Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
davek said:
Importantly though:

"J&J’s main study goal was the prevention of moderate to severe Covid-19, and the vaccine was 85% effective in stopping severe disease and preventing hospitalisation across all geographies and against multiple variants 28 days after immunisation."
Click to expand...

The AZ vaccine is 100% proven to be effective against stopping severe disease and preventing hospitalisation too.

What's the difference?

BTW, I'm obviously thrilled that there's another vaccine on the way, and Novovax not far behind possibly. It's great news. The more the bettter.
 
davek said:
Behviour needs to change. I dont think that's up for debate. The murderer's tried to go back to the old normal last summer and autumn and killed another 60,000.

If you dont want mass death every year, we have to change our society. Maybe you accept those losses, I and the majority of people dont.
Click to expand...

They tried to go back to normal without a vaccine. They were wrong.

Why will there be mass death every year? Do we not currently have a vaccination programme underway?

The issue is that when you say behaviour needs to change, do you mean in regards to how we function as a society in a global pandemic? Yes I'm sure a majority of people do agree with that. Global pandemics don't exactly happen every year do they? So really are you talking about change in general to a society which you personally would more like to see, irrespective of a pandemic?

I'm very curious to know what an acceptable level of death is from coronavirus or any other virus that you would accept in the years to come? Whitty said just the other week that society will eventually reach a level of death it is prepared to tolerate in order to function as a society where preventing death is not the only purpose of existence. I'm guessing for you that level is zero. But I would argue that a majority of people would say that if our sole priority in society becomes saving/extending lives then we might as well call it existing rather than living as we won't be making the most of our lives. I am prepared to do as much as I can up to the point where it negatively impacts my own life. Everyone will have that line. I'm confident in saying that your line is probably much further along than mine. In a global pandemic, I know my line doesn't matter. But once the vaccine has been rolled out across the country I'm pretty sure people won't be prepared to put their own lives on hold or have them negatively impacted, or accept more state interference in their lives than what has occurred since March 2020.
 
Toast said:
Well asking people to wear masks in a shop isn’t a straightforward as the news would have you think.

Sake, some proper ball bags out today just wanting the argument.

Bloody just been called to deal with one fella who quoted the equality act at me FFS.
Click to expand...
Just to add the legal papers arrived with regards to this today.
The chap is suing us for a good few grand.
 
Last edited:
roydo said:
The Germans issue with the over 65 stuff was due to German underwriters of private medical insurance. It was buried in a post that was a statement from them.
Click to expand...
Not true. It was a sentence about the general function of STIKO

“but its advice determines what vaccines are considered standard for which groups, and therefore covered by health insurance.”

But in this case I don’t see the relevance as vaccinations are being done for free.
 
www.ema.europa.eu

EMA recommends COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca for authorisation in the EU | European Medicines Agency (EMA)

www.ema.europa.eu www.ema.europa.eu

Most of the participants in these studies were between 18 and 55 years old. There are not yet enough results in older participants (over 55 years old) to provide a figure for how well the vaccine will work in this group. However, protection is expected, given that an immune response is seen in this age group and based on experience with other vaccines; as there is reliable information on safety in this population, EMA’s scientific experts considered that the vaccine can be used in older adults. More information is expected from ongoing studies, which include a higher proportion of elderly participants.

So...exactly what those charlatans at the MHRA concluded? I guess they're all in on it together right?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top