Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

[roydo]

You’re a government scientist on the quiet aren’t you @roydo ?lol

lol

Used to deliver to the GP surgeries round me, and on nodding terms with the chemist, (dont even bother asking what the address is anymore), thats my skill set.

 

[Alan Whittle]

lol

Used to deliver to the GP surgeries round me, and on nodding terms with the chemist, (dont even bother asking what the address is anymore), thats my skill set.

It’s more than enough

 

[peteblue]

I think it was more the UK regulator granted emergency approval mate, rather then who ordered or payed more.

If I was looking at it from a rigours safety point of view, the Oxford team rushed things a tad and as such their initial finding were sketchy and needed revision. They wouldn’t have met European safety standards initially, they only applied themselves for approval in the EU a couple of weeks ago, knowing this. To be honest I wouldn’t be rushing to take it unless they had or they do get that approval.

Im not sure if the problems effecting the supply of the EU deliveries will effect the UK going forward, do you know? as you say the market place might get very crowded very soon.

The U.K. has the highest medical standards in the world. The EMA was not based in London for its nightlife.....

 

[Neiler]

The U.K. has the highest medical standards in the world. The EMA was not based in London for its nightlife.....

Independently away from the EMA after Brexit I think that remains to be seen, I wouldn’t question that assertion until proven otherwise, they’ve made some big decisions very quickly on the AZ vaccine, there is still only a handful of countries who have approved it, I’m not saying it shouldn’t be approved or trying to scare people, but most of the world are taking their time drilling into it. The other big decision is the one dose vaccine call, also the interpretation of MRNA vaccines and the 12 week spacing, again the UK may prove visionaries. But we can’t draw any conclusions just yet as it’s all still feeling it’s way in the dark.

 

[Billy Dean]

I think it was more the UK regulator granted emergency approval mate, rather then who ordered or payed more.

If I was looking at it from a rigours safety point of view, the Oxford team rushed things a tad and as such their initial finding were sketchy and needed revision. They wouldn’t have met European safety standards initially, they only applied themselves for approval in the EU a couple of weeks ago, knowing this. To be honest I wouldn’t be rushing to take it unless they had or they do get that approval.

Im not sure if the problems effecting the supply of the EU deliveries will effect the UK going forward, do you know? as you say the market place might get very crowded very soon.

The German health minister was saying they didn’t want to go through a quick approval process because they were worried about anti vaxxers accusing them of cutting corners. That does sound plausible to me as apparently anti vaxx sentiment is higher in the EU. Still, might have just been covering his arse a little bit too.

 

[Billy Dean]

The U.K. has the highest medical standards in the world. The EMA was not based in London for its nightlife.....

You can procure some excellent pharmaceuticals on a night out in London

 

[peteblue]

Independently away from the EMA after Brexit I think that remains to be seen, I wouldn’t question that assertion until proven otherwise, they’ve made some big decisions very quickly on the AZ vaccine, there is still only a handful of countries who have approved it, I’m not saying it shouldn’t be approved or trying to scare people, but most of the world are taking their time drilling into it. The other big decision is the one dose vaccine call, also the interpretation of MRNA vaccines and the 12 week spacing, again the UK may prove visionaries. But we can’t draw any conclusions just yet as it’s all still feeling it’s way in the dark.

The EMA are going to approve the Oxford vaccine, I know it, you know it and they know it. They wouldn’t be kicking up such a fuss about deliveries if that were not so, they’d be trying to get out of the contract. So let’s stop all the pretence. If the U.K. MHRA say it’s ok then it’s ok. If the new EMA say it’s not, we would still use it and you would too....

 

[Neiler]

The German health minister was saying they didn’t want to go through a quick approval process because they were worried about anti vaxxers accusing them of cutting corners. That does sound plausible to me as apparently anti vaxx sentiment is higher in the EU. Still, might have just been covering his arse a little bit too.

I’d be quite concerned if that was the case mate. I think if anything the EMA are a bit non plusesed on political influence, as it should be really when it comes to public health, we have all lived through the dangers of when public health and political agendas have had competing needs.

Anti Vaxers are easy from my point of view, debate away, lobby away, if you don’t want to take a vaccine, don’t take it once you take on the personal risks. I think it’s a minimal issue to be honest.

 

[BlueToff]

I don’t want a slanging match, but I have fears about how they are prioritising these vaccines! 85 year olds that have outlived their life expectancy shouldn’t be getting it before 45 year olds that have multiple comorbidities and four children to bring up!

Erm, 85-year-olds are more likely to die if they get this, that's why they've prioritised getting it to those people.

I half get your point, and in Indonesia they are doing it the opposite way round to us, but the likelihood is that if we vaccinated younger/healthier people, we'd still have a fair chunk of deaths from this because the majority of people dying are 70+, and the virus isn't going anywhere soon, so they'd still be catching it.

 

[Neiler]

The EMA are going to approve the Oxford vaccine, I know it, you know it and they know it. They wouldn’t be kicking up such a fuss about deliveries if that were not so, they’d be trying to get out of the contract. So let’s stop all the pretence. If the U.K. MHRA say it’s ok then it’s ok. If the new EMA say it’s not, we would still use it and you would too....

I’d say it would be surprising if they don’t, but I don’t think anything is certain until it’s certain. Objectively the Oxford teams and AZ presentation of data was awful and needed revision, I’ll be glad the EMA waited for approval on that score if/when it’s given.

Yeah agreed mate, you can only go with your own national regulatory organisation, the only decision you have to make is your trust in it or not and that is a personal decision.

Personally I wouldn’t use a vaccine if it wasn’t passed by our national/EU regulation here, but that’s not relevant to the UK and you have to do the same thing and trust your regulator.

 

[BlueStevie35]

Hospital figures - 647 deaths were announced today, down 108 on yesterday and up 70 on last Monday. 609 deaths were in English hospitals, down 14 on yesterday and up 77 on last week. The 7 day rolling average rises to 910.86

All settings - for the 28 day cut off, 592 deaths were announced today, down 18 on yesterday and down 7 on last Monday. The 7 day rolling average falls to 1238.71

For the 60 day cut off, 623 deaths were announced today, down 12 on yesterday and up 8 on last Monday. The 7 day rolling average rises to 1341.43

 

[peteblue]

I don’t want a slanging match, but I have fears about how they are prioritising these vaccines! 85 year olds that have outlived their life expectancy shouldn’t be getting it before 45 year olds that have multiple comorbidities and four children to bring up!

You’re right mate. No one over 40 should be getting this, let them all die. Do you have any grandparents alive btw.....

 

[Tubey]

If true, this is horrifying from the EU.

There's NO way the vaccine is acceptable under 65 but suddenly a placebo over the age of 65. If 8% was true, it wouldn't be approved, end of story. It makes no biological sense for such a discrepancy.

So it leads to the obvious conclusion - this, if true, is nakedly, overwhelmingly political and astonishingly irresponsible, and they need to publish hard, irrefutable data behind it immediately.

 

[Moomin]

If true, this is horrifying from the EU.

There's NO way the vaccine is acceptable under 65 but suddenly a placebo over the age of 65. If 8% was true, it wouldn't be approved, end of story. It makes no biological sense for such a discrepancy.

So it leads to the obvious conclusion - this, if true, is nakedly, overwhelmingly political and astonishingly irresponsible, and they need to publish hard, irrefutable data behind it immediately.

How is it political??

 

[grandjoeblue]

If true, this is horrifying from the EU.

There's NO way the vaccine is acceptable under 65 but suddenly a placebo over the age of 65. If 8% was true, it wouldn't be approved, end of story. It makes no biological sense for such a discrepancy.

So it leads to the obvious conclusion - this, if true, is nakedly, overwhelmingly political and astonishingly irresponsible, and they need to publish hard, irrefutable data behind it immediately.

If its remotely true the UK is back to square one and is in a terrible position. Lockdown will need to be extended for months and months.