Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
lfc1971
02 Dec 20 08:51
Joined:
Date Joined: 06 Nov 11
| Topic/replies: 55,487 | Blogger: lfc1971's blog
Roll out possible next week

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 1 of 11  •  Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 11 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 405
By:
nineteen points
When: 02 Dec 20 08:52
form a queue
By:
PorcupineorPineapple
When: 02 Dec 20 08:57
Excellent news
By:
lfc1971
When: 02 Dec 20 08:59
Yes good  news , Dept. of health made the announcement 7:00 this morning
By:
lfc1971
When: 02 Dec 20 09:00
It is almost spring
By:
nineteen points
When: 02 Dec 20 09:33
the cynical side of me says what a very good day to be able to roll out a vaccine after a good arze kicking in the commons last night.

any odds on a last minute hitch which delays the new wonder drug?
By:
1st time poster
When: 02 Dec 20 09:33
i dont get it as confirmed by hancock this morning just like those who,ve had covid,the vaccine has
no evidence it stops you getting it
no evidence it stops you transmitting it
no evidence of herd immunity

EVIDENCE IT STOPS YOU DYING

so for 99.5% of population nothings changed

if people return to normal and vulnerable people still end up in hospital and people return to normal,the reason giving for restrictions keeping pressure of NHS ,will still be there
By:
1st time poster
When: 02 Dec 20 09:37
its like hancock banging on about mass testing in l,pool,no evidence mass testing helped in l,pool all area,s where no testing took place in l,pool numbers came down just the same,manchester,s numbers came down, scarborough had 650 per 100,000 no testing numbers down to a 100
l,pool been used as a political football, just heard their in 1st area,s for the vaccine,why, surely common sense says tier 3 area,s should get vaccine before tier 2
By:
nineteen points
When: 02 Dec 20 09:38
1tp, i couldnt work out either what he was on about.he doesnt know if it stops you passing it on yet as they dont know if it stops you getting it.so we are have an asymptomatic vaccine Mischief

could one of the clever lads on here explain please?
By:
1st time poster
When: 02 Dec 20 09:39
that counts me out Laugh
By:
1st time poster
When: 02 Dec 20 09:46
heard hancock and co saying nhs workers,pm etc should get vaccine 1st ,thats plainly a foooking stupid idea what happens if there are side effects,mistakes etc,etc,
By:
feedthepony
When: 02 Dec 20 09:54
How com China got back to normal without one?
By:
GAZO
When: 02 Dec 20 09:54
evidence it only stops you from dying ,so you would think the older generation and vunerable would get it first
By:
1st time poster
When: 02 Dec 20 10:09
by stopping you dying
does that mean you still get poorly ,hospitalised etc,but eventually survive, or is it just a great experiment,learn as we jog along
By:
nineteen points
When: 02 Dec 20 10:14
we need mex and fats to explain it to us.
By:
1st time poster
When: 02 Dec 20 10:15
if i want one i,m number 7 on the list,
if its still around by then vaccine cant be doing much good
By:
1st time poster
When: 02 Dec 20 10:23
any anti vaxer,s/worried well wont be reassured by this press conference just repeating lines of a script nothing to do with the questions their been asked, basically trust us we,ve been working weekends Sad
By:
nineteen points
When: 02 Dec 20 10:34
why has nobody asked why the companies who have developed them been given a pass free from compensating anyone who is harmed by them
By:
peckerdunne
When: 02 Dec 20 10:41
Left with the feeling, what are they not telling us..
By:
1st time poster
When: 02 Dec 20 10:42
weve been told for 8 months that lots of those whove died would have died anyway, which means lots of those vaccinated 1st are going to die,wont look good for a full roll out
By:
i_agree_with_nick
When: 02 Dec 20 10:46
why has nobody asked why the companies who have developed them been given a pass free from compensating anyone who is harmed by them


This question has been asked and answered many times.
By:
dave1357
When: 02 Dec 20 10:47
nineteen pints doesn't do reading answers only whining.
By:
dave1357
When: 02 Dec 20 10:49
bee whining about masks, whining about lockdowns and now that the solution is here, he's whining about that as well.
By:
----you-have-to-laugh---
When: 02 Dec 20 10:54
weve been told for 8 months that lots of those whove died would have died anyway, which means lots of those vaccinated 1st are going to die,wont look good for a full roll out

It's a covid vaccine not an elixir of life
nor universal panacea Happy
By:
edy
When: 02 Dec 20 11:00

Dec 2, 2020 -- 3:54AM, feedthepony wrote:


How com China got back to normal without one?


lack of free thinking nancies in China that refuse to abide by simple and reasonable measures

By:
edy
When: 02 Dec 20 11:03
And the ones that do refuse are being dealt with properly.
By:
peckerdunne
When: 02 Dec 20 11:35
a small piece of RNA from the spike to trigger immune system,but not to create more virus in the body, just as long as the immunity is significantly long, and obviously as long as the assertion of no negative effects from it.

So all in all a brilliant thing, if proven otherwise, well some serious fall out and embarrassment, to put it mildly.
By:
peckerdunne
When: 02 Dec 20 11:38
off course you always knew it would be the Germans, i mean they had a head start in many ways Laugh
By:
peckerdunne
When: 02 Dec 20 11:40
on the other hand, Hancock thinks it was the Tories...
By:
Fatslogger
When: 02 Dec 20 11:59
Didn’t hear the Hancock prezza so can’t comment on what he said in detail.

The Pfizer vaccine trials were pretty big. You can’t rule out increased incidence of some rare condition a late side effect but generally vaccine side effects aren’t late and over 20k people given it reassures me a lot. Clearly that’s not the same as risk being zero though. Certainly I wouldn’t worry that large numbers of NHS workers will be struck down by a side effect that wasn’t seen in the trials.

In terms of efficacy, we know the Pfizer vaccine was very good indeed at stopping symptomatic coronavirus infections and prevented I think all hospitalisations in the treatment arm. You could argue the trial wasn’t powered to determine effects on deaths but there were none from Covid in treatment arm and I think we can be very confident indeed that the short to medium term protection offered against clinically meaningful disease is excellent. This doesn’t directly tell us for sure about transmission, which is less important than preventing severe infections in vulnerable people (we’re aiming to protect them rather than their contacts) but is an issue for care home and NHS staff. Essentially though, if the vaccine is preventing the vast majority of symptomatic infections, it’s very unlikely that it’s not at least having a good effect on reducing infections in total and on transmission. Bear in mind that asymptomatic infection is less spreadable than symptomatic (although with the down side that you don’t know you’re infectious, of course).

Funnily enough, the different trail protocol for the AstraZeneca / Oxford vaccine tells us quite a lot more about prevention of spread, because they did asymptotic swab testing. I’ll try to dig out my post about it, as I was quite proud of it at the time.
By:
Fatslogger
When: 02 Dec 20 12:03
From the Oxford Vaccine thread -

If you think about say 100 people who would catch the novel Coronavirus without vaccination and develop symptoms and you give them an effective vaccine, it’s fairly plausible that say:

60 of them wouldn’t catch it at all, or at least not to an extent that you’d pick it up with a weekly swab (some of these you might if testing daily)
30 of them would catch it but without symptoms (this group overlaps with the group above depending on how hard you look for infection)
10 of them would catch it and get symptoms but on average wouldn’t be as sick as the sickest 10 in the original unvaccinated group. You could postulate that the hospitalisations, trips to critical care and certainly one or two deaths you’d expect wouldn’t happen.

Depending on how you screen for infections in your trial, you might present fairly different figures for the first 90 and you could easily also get at least somewhat different numbers for the last group of 10, because these would be rare outcomes more subject to random variation skewing your stats. So it would be hard to determine real differences between especially quite similarly good vaccines, because the methods used in trials weren’t the same.
By:
nineteen points
When: 02 Dec 20 12:06
nick and dave,
i was referring to the media asking the experts on tv this morning.try to keep up before making your snide remarks
By:
nineteen points
When: 02 Dec 20 12:14
fats,you say you havent seen handcock prezza.well as you say to me on many occasions.....google it.Mischief
By:
xmoneyx
When: 02 Dec 20 12:42
UK’s Johnson: No Plan to Make Covid Vaccine Mandatory


odds on FM of scotland makes it mandatory
By:
Tom Salt
When: 02 Dec 20 12:59
Pfizer is a USA corporation. Why has't this vaccine been approved over there? Does anybody know?
By:
GAZO
When: 02 Dec 20 13:11
will be fun if they deny it
By:
Fatslogger
When: 02 Dec 20 13:15

Dec 2, 2020 -- 6:14AM, nineteen points wrote:


fats,you say you havent seen handcock prezza.well as you say to me on many occasions.....google it.


Life’s a bit short, 19. To be fair to Hancock, the last few times I’ve heard him speak, especially on vaccination, he’s been bang on the money and I don’t say that because I like the guy or respect him, because I really, really don’t. I’ve explained my take on the likely effect on spread though and I reckon, decent though he’s been on this topic, I’m a better opinion than he is.

I will try to watch it later though.

By:
dukeofpuke
When: 02 Dec 20 13:25
In the USA the FDA

Scope and funding[edit]
The FDA regulates more than US$2.4 trillion worth of consumer goods, about 25% of consumer expenditures in the United States. This includes $466 billion in food sales, $275 billion in drugs, $60 billion in cosmetics and $18 billion in vitamin supplements. Much of these expenditures are for goods imported into the United States; the FDA is responsible for monitoring imports.[19]

The FDA's federal budget request for fiscal year (FY) 2012 totaled $4.36 billion,[7] while the proposed 2014 budget is $4.7 billion.[20] About $2 billion of this budget is generated by user fees. Pharmaceutical firms pay the majority of these fees,[20] which are used to expedite drug reviews.[21] The FDA's federal budget request for fiscal year (FY) 2008 (October 2007 through September 2008) totaled $2.1 billion, a $105.8 million increase from what it received for fiscal year 2007.[22]

In February 2008, the FDA announced that the Bush Administration's FY 2009 budget request for the agency was just under $2.4 billion: $1.77 billion in budget authority (federal funding) and $628 million in user fees. The requested budget authority was an increase of $50.7 million more than the FY 2008 funding – about a three percent increase. In June 2008, Congress gave the agency an emergency appropriation of $150 million for FY 2008 and another $150 million.[19]

Wikipedia
By:
i_agree_with_nick
When: 02 Dec 20 13:26
Fatslogger,

Did you say you have a medical acground?
By:
the old nanny ;-)
When: 02 Dec 20 13:33
Great news  1st to go with a Vaccine in Europe  Grin and Appear to have distribution sorted

Using the Nightingales among other things Grin Once the elderley and Vulnerable sorted we

should see a rapid Decrease in deaths , Plus we have the Oxo vaccine  Going forward  Grin

Hopefully by Cheltenham we  will be out of all this and Back to normal ..
Page 1 of 11  •  Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 11 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com