Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Neiler said:
Just about getting over my second jab of Pfizer, not messing it knocked me for six, run 5- 10k every second day, in the gym the other, live healthy and have a high level of fitness.

First jab was grand I’d say I was at about 90% of normal, a bit of pain in the arm for a couple of days. Second jab, on the button of 21 days, floored me, slept most of the day yesterday, weak, fatigue, nausea, fever, swollen arm, headaches, basically floored - two days of work - but coming around now.

Based on my expierence the second jab was the one that activated and stimulated the immune system to the DNA of the virus. The first jab was the primer, the body recognising the threat, grand. The second was the body absolutely going to war on the second dose of DNA, haven’t been that sick in years. I’d say I’m awash with antibodies now.

Anyhow just a heads up to anyone waiting for round 2 Pfizer, I thought after the first, ah yeah I’ll be grand after not having a problem after the first, but the second absolutely floored me. Might just be my immune system mind, but heads up.
Click to expand...

I think I’ll go with the AZ.....
 
tsubaki said:
a bit of a risible post this - everyone on here wants vaccinations to work, the objection is to using them in a way that we do not know whether they'll work or not (and the possible impact this will have on a million very vulnerable people)
Click to expand...
Some people seem to want certain vaccines to fail (AZ) and others keep making points about the gaps between vaccines every day of the week. I for one hope they are extremely wrong.

For example initial results for the AZ vaccine has already is pointing towards these people being very wrong.
 
grandjoeblue said:
Some people seem to want certain vaccines to fail (AZ) and others keep making points about the gaps between vaccines every day of the week. I for one hope they are extremely wrong.

For example initial results for the AZ vaccine has already is pointing towards these people being very wrong.
Click to expand...

Cant speak for the first point, but the second is based on all the available evidence we have.

As I’ve said multiple times, I hope it works but we could at least acknowledge the risk that is being run with those people.

The British Government in general and this one in particular have a long and shameful history of allowing mass casualty events to occur when they could have been easily prevented, after all.
 
tsubaki said:
The British Government in general and this one in particular have a long and shameful history of allowing mass casualty events to occur when they could have been easily prevented, after all.
Click to expand...
Just a little... Its like sticking your hand in a fire, then complaining profusely about being burnt...
 
tsubaki said:
Cant speak for the first point, but the second is based on all the available evidence we have.

As I’ve said multiple times, I hope it works but we could at least acknowledge the risk that is being run with those people.

The British Government in general and this one in particular have a long and shameful history of allowing mass casualty events to occur when they could have been easily prevented, after all.
Click to expand...
Have you got a study which shows long gaps don't work for Pfizer? I haven't seen that study.
 
maccavennie said:
The crazy thing is Toff that I'm not sure it boils down to how healthy you are. It's a case of if the body responds to the medication. Don't get me wrong your in a better position if you haven't got underlying health conditions but it definitely felt a little like the luck of the draw that some respond, some don't. When I came out 2 people I know went in, one is still in and in a bad way, the other has just come out and can barely walk up the stairs.

Anyway, like you say mate they will be coming up with all kinds of new meds and ways to treat it and when the worst happened and I ended up in hospital, the staff were just amazing and so positive and mentally that put me in such a determined mood.
Click to expand...

Sorry I don't mean in terms of being fit or healthy in that sense. I mean if you don't have an underlying condition, or if you're on the younger side, or how the body responds. I didn't mean if you run a mile a day that you're invincible.

The example my housemate used was she treated two people, both in their 50s, both 'fit and healthy' - not smokers, exercised regularly etc. One of them didn't make it through, and had an underlying condition (COPD which is what my dad had so I am worried about him and have been all along). The other one didn't and made it. But to look at them both, she said they were both as 'healthy' as each other. One of them just had that one weakness that the virus latched onto. I know it's not the case with everybody.
 
tsubaki said:
Cant speak for the first point, but the second is based on all the available evidence we have.

As I’ve said multiple times, I hope it works but we could at least acknowledge the risk that is being run with those people.

The British Government in general and this one in particular have a long and shameful history of allowing mass casualty events to occur when they could have been easily prevented, after all.
Click to expand...
We don't have evidence - that's the point. We have a lack of it. Which I agree is the issue. But all we actually have are warnings - it 'might' do this, 'we think this will happen'. No proof either way just yet. Let's hope that changes soon.

The CMOs did acknowledge the risk, in the presser last week. They also explained why they had taken it.

Hopefully the studies that were published the other day are proven to be correct.
 
theconversation.com

Vaccine rollouts, school testing and contact tracing could all be improved – here’s how

We are repeatedly missing opportunities to gain quality evidence to help us manage the pandemic – that’s why we need designed evaluations.
theconversation.com theconversation.com
The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation has advised delaying the second dose of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine from the recommended three weeks to 12 weeks, in order to get more people vaccinated with their first dose.
Without questioning the public health reasoning behind this decision, which is based on supply shortage, is is still worth quantifying the effect of extending the dose interval.

This is particularly pertinent for the elderly population who have been prioritised for vaccination, as a recent small real-world study demonstrated a substantial diversity of immune response three weeks after the first dose among people aged over 80, with seven out of 15 exhibiting a weak antibody response, which subsequently increased three weeks after the second dose. This may suggest that a shorter period between doses would be better for some elderly people, but we can’t know without a robust evaluation.

A solid evaluation of the longer dose interval on vaccine effectiveness with regard to COVID-19 diagnosis can be done cheaply and efficiently while rolling out the vaccination programme, by giving a relatively small fraction of people the second dose after three weeks. As most people would still be assigned to the 12-week interval, this experimental design would still achieve the aim of large coverage with the first dose but, in just a few weeks, we would have solid statistical evidence on the comparative effectiveness of the dose intervals.

We should seize the opportunity to provide the UK and the world with invaluable knowledge on how to plan optimal rollout strategies for the first mRNA vaccine ever to be approved.
 
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