thfcsteff
Terry Dyson
...we're back to traffic lights aren't we...
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Coronavirus
- Thread starter markysimmo
- Start date
...we're back to traffic lights aren't we...
thfcsteff
Terry Dyson
There have been 18 years since 2003. Other than Branston doing the unthinkable and producing "small chunk" pickle, do you think there have been any other notable developments in both society and science? Y'know, things like fast-tracking our disastrous march into fudging the climate up? My instinct is that there have been a fair few...
...out of interest, what would you have said about the AIDS crisis? Would you have dismissed the idea of safe-sex as percentage-based "cowering"? Look, just like safe-sex, masks and social distancing cannot ever be implemented with the iron fist you appear to believe exists.
They are recommendations based on firm scientific/biological information.
MOST people would, I think, trust this information, especially when it revolves around an unknown medical foe. Granted, there will always be David Icke and like-minded folk who believe that all gvmt and scientists who consult with them are reptiles from the planet Zaarg, and there will further be a proportion of people who are simply paranoid about trusting anyone. But the vast majority of people I know are willing to back experts in their field and follow a few simple recommendations. It is not "cowering in the corner."
I still cannot fully grasp your view on COVID. This is what it comes across as:
You believe in people going about their lives as normal.
You believe that if the death rate is largely restricted to the elderly and people with pre- conditions, then you're fine just going on with life.
Again, this is what it feels like you believe. If I have got that wrong, corrections would be appreciated and apologies will ensue.
Last edited:
Mikey10
Pat van den Hauwe
Perhaps not, according to the early data coming out of Israel - and the point made by a number of epidemiologists (see The Guardian and BMJ articles that I posted above) that leaving such a large time between doses could encourage the virus to mutate further, and in a way which makes it vaccine resistant.
Bedfordspurs
Martin Peters
My wife has heard through work that it’s a combination of supply and staffing issues
SteveAWOL
Colin Calderwood
That Guardian journalist’s article (whilst I have a subscription I find most of their COVID-19 stuff has become tediously blinkered clickbait) lead me to this thread in which some immunologists discuss the efficacy of single dose regimen... hopefully a detailed study will be forthcoming in lieu of the lack of phase 3 data beyond 21 days...
Last edited:
Mikey10
Pat van den Hauwe
It’s unclear. Which is the point, really, I suppose. As noted in the BMJ article, by administering the vaccination programme in a way that runs contrary to the research which saw the vaccines initially approved we are essentially conducting an experiment on a national scale.
You dont know that... the fact is that no one knows that.
This government has decided to gamble on the presumption 1 dose is enough.
As others have mentioned that poses many potentially catastrophic risks, most notable of which is its the ideal breading ground for a vaccine resistant strain of the virus.
johnola
Mauricio Taricco
But I do know that. The professional scientists laid the argument for the decision out for all of us.
When more trial phase results and analysis of the actuality comes in they will review their understanding and recommend tweaks to the plans accordingly.
Certainly I take the point that the potential for a vaccine resistant strain to come out is enhanced, but the multiple vaccine approach must mitigate that considerably. Not that I have seen this discussed anywhere.
Also the regulator aren’t saying one dose is enough, just delaying the second would appear to be beneficial.
And then the government scientists take into account the other relevant inputs, seasonality, epidemiology and supply logistics etc.
johnola
Mauricio Taricco
Yes and if that is the case you would expect them to alter their strategy as rapidly as before. As I said, expect changes. I note that that relates to Pfizer- and not fully formalised - The Oxford efficacy could be shaped entirely differently.
Note that the uk will now have plenty of data and analysis around the efficacy of these vaccinations for the elderly and younger care workers as the programme has been running longer here than in Israel.
SteveAWOL
Colin Calderwood
Yeah, it’s undoubtedly a calculated risk and wish that someone had the foresight to request more data on different dosage spacing when Pfizer and AstraZeneca were conducting their phase 3 trials plus informed GPs before they began roll out; rather than constantly moving the goalposts.
However, I see from that BMJ article you posted link to that the small amount of data for the Oxford vaccine indicates that 12 weeks spacing does produce superior efficacy...
The trials of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine did include different spacing between doses, finding that a longer gap (two to three months) led to a greater immune response, but the overall participant numbers were small... The combined trial results, published in the Lancet, found that vaccine efficacy 14 days after a second dose was higher in the group that had more than six weeks between the two doses (65.4%) than in the group that had less than six weeks between doses (53.4%).
A paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine stated that the efficacy of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was 52.4% between the first and second dose (spaced 21 days apart). However, in its “green book” Public Health England said that during the phase III trial most of the vaccine failures were in the days immediately after the first dose, indicating that the short term protection starts around day 10. Looking at the data from day 15 to 21, it calculated that the efficacy against symptomatic covid-19 was around 89% (95% confidence interval 52% to 97%).
ICYMI here’s the phase 3 trial data report they refer to which shows how antibody response only starts about 10-17 days after first jab in most people; which is why immunologists are hypothesising that many of those who have tested positive following a single dose in Israel might’ve been infected either before they were even given jab or perhaps let their guard down prematurely (I hope that everyone in UK receiving jab is warned that whether they get 1 or 2 doses the immunity will still take weeks to begin).
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577
Shown is the cumulative incidence of Covid-19 after the first dose (modified intention-to-treat population). Each symbol represents Covid-19 cases starting on a given day; filled symbols represent severe Covid-19 cases. Some symbols represent more than one case, owing to overlapping dates. The inset shows the same data on an enlarged y axis, through 21 days.
Last edited:
LutonSpurs
Eric Dear
No you don't know that. You won't know until way down the line
There was also many very prominent scientists that have disagreed with the uk's approach to single dose (thats what it will be for a lot of people) or delayed second dose vaccination and the companies who have made the vaccines have said they have only tested for 2 doses within the 28 (i think) day time frame.
Long and the short of it is this:
We are taking a gamble here which may work out and if it does will mean that we can get back to near normal a couple or best case scenario a few months months quicker than we would have if we kept the 2 vaccines within 28 days plan.
But if it doesn't work out then our gamble may lead to potentially catastrophic results such as an all vaccine resistant strain. Which will set us and the world back years.
Alter what strategy? The single dose strategy? If the virus mutates and becomes vaccine resistant it will be much too late.
Although in fairness I can definitely see this government doing something as stupid and incompetent as that.
LutonSpurs
Eric Dear
SteveAWOL
Colin Calderwood
Here you go...
https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-r...iontech-announce-publication-results-landmark
The cumulative incidence of Covid-19 cases over time among placebo and vaccine recipients begins to diverge by 12 days after the first dose, 7 days after the estimated median viral incubation period of 5 days,indicating the early onset of a partially protective effect of immunization. The study was not designed to assess the efficacy of a single-dose regimen. Nevertheless, in the interval between the first and second doses, the observed vaccine efficacy against Covid-19 was 52%, and in the first 7 days after dose 2, it was 91%, reaching full efficacy against disease with onset at least 7 days after dose 2. Of the 10 cases of severe Covid-19 that were observed after the first dose, only 1 occurred in the vaccine group. This finding is consistent with overall high efficacy against all Covid-19 cases.
And here’s what Dr Fauci’s Food and Drugs Administration had to say about that trial data, their Vaccine Efficacy for single dose is 82%...
https://www.fda.gov/media/144325/download
johnola
Mauricio Taricco
It’s all up for grabs. Prompt and sharp decision making had been absent so personally I welcome it when it makes an appearance.
What do you find so politically relevant about the vaccination program? It’s surely a triumph of science and all the various National governments are making foul ups over logistics and organisation.
Have you a specific political agenda that intrudes even into this topic?
Thank you. That is relevant but does still leave room for the virus to mutate in to a vaccine resistant strain.
My political agenda is that I think that the government has continually fudged up with covid. And on the face of it the vaccine roll out has been going well but they have decided to gamble on the efficacy of single dose... with their track record during this pandemic I would have preferred them to be more risk adverse... and dare I say it more conservative.
Mikey10
Pat van den Hauwe
They are all trying to erase history. There’s only Laurence Fox, Lord Sumption, a few Tory backbenchers and Scara left.