Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

[davek]

Maybe I misunderstood, but I thought Whitty’s statement about ‘those the vaccine won’t work on’ just referred to the known % that trials showed didn’t get immunity. The Pfizer is 95% after both doses (I think), so that’s still 1 in 20 people who won’t be protected.

So even if the entire population got vaccinated (which obviously won’t happen), there’d still be over 3m who wouldn’t have immunity.

Didn’t feel like new information to me, but maybe I missed something.

That was in relation to protection against getting the virus; the overall claim was that there would be protection from hospitalisation and grave illness regardless of that.

 

[peteblue]

That's not good at all but that must be an issue in the specific authority he lives in. That's really bad that they haven't sorted it having been made aware.

It must be a Pfizer jab as the AZ was only approved at the back end of December ......

 

[davek]

??????????????

Where's the contradiction?????

 

[tsubaki]

You evidently know nothing about manufacturing or production. Product cannot just appear from nowhere. It has to be made, somewhere. It is not hard to imagine that these places are working 24/7 providing source material is fully available. So, where did the 9 million come from. Either AZ broke the contract with the U.K. (they didn’t) or Boris gave them some (he didn’t) or they put in additional work at the EU plant and promised to bring forward 9 million that were scheduled for the following quarter (they did)......they used best endeavours to affect the production schedule a couple of months down the line.....

Pete, it isn't a matter of manufacturing or production - it is a matter of language.

The word "best" means the highest standard, the greatest amount achieveable etc. A company's "best efforts" cannot by definition be "our best Q1 efforts are X" when they subsequently (when challenged) say "actually, our best Q1 efforts are Y".

I mean, even you acknowledge this in that post - if it was possible to do that, then that they didn't do it when they were putting "best efforts" in mean that the first answer cannot have been their "best efforts". If it was, then it wouldn't have been possible to deliver the extra 9 million doses.

 

[Wizard]

It must be a Pfizer jab as the AZ was only approved at the back end of December ......

Doesn't make a difference which one it is, people shouldn't be waiting past 12 weeks

 

[BlueToff]

Wow really, that’s mental.

@Leylo sad to here that. The issue seems to be that at the start of this process it really wasn't at all like it is now. It was all done over the phone/invitation, whereas now people book in - by and large - themselves online and also book their second jab at the same time. For example, my nana got her first in mid-January. She's 80, got dementia, and needed my auntie to take her to the clinic. She couldn't have booked online. So my aunt took her and, as it was the end of the day, my aunt also got a jab as they had spare Pfizer which would have gone to waste if not. Those two still need to receive their second date, but should be getting the appointment any time soon.

on the other hand, my dad's gap is 10.5 weeks (Feb 21st to May 14th), my mum's gap is 9 (March 16th to the start of June) (as they've already got their second ones booked in).

But, I appreciate the anger, it's not good to make sweeping statements like 'they aren't sticking to 12 weeks'.

The logistics are incredible for this. The issue will be ensuring people who had their jabs at the start when it was more about getting old/vulnerable people (who also may rely on others to get them there, and those others may also have been jabbed too) get theirs. It won't be an 'issue' on a wider scale, but there will be glitches. They'll get it sorted though. It's what they do.

 

[Neiler]

The U.K. are not forbidding any vaccine from leaving the country. AZ are delivering it to wherever their contracts say it should go. It’s very simple.....and as for any ‘consequences’, I think the U.K. fully understand the vindictive nature of the EU, hence why we are investing in our own capability....”boundless compassion” hahahaha.......

The U.K. are mate, they’ve let 0 vaccines out of the 1 U.K. plant. 3 others in the EU are supplying 75% of U.K. AZ doses. If the EU did what the U.K. are doing AZ supply in the U.K. is cut by 75%, that’s just AZ. Imagine it did the same with Pfizer and Jansen (Belgium) when it’s approved. Half the U.K. doses so far are from the EU.

So 75% of the UKs production of AZ comes from the EU, AZ contractual obligation to the EU is down 75% this quarter.

That just AZ. If the EU was to export the same % as the U.K. does vaccine wise or took the same approach as the U.K. AZ supply would be cut 75%, vaccine supply would be halved. As for the long term, nothing surer then that not remaining the status quo as rounds of this go forward, should never bite the hand that feeds you, very short sighted, takes the gloss of the U.K. roll out for me which has been brilliant, when a light is shown on the supply chain and dynamics.

In this instance, eating cake won’t soon be forgotten, unfortunately.

 

[peteblue]

Doesn't make a difference which one it is, people shouldn't be waiting past 12 weeks

Of course, sorry, I was thinking about availability....

 

[peteblue]

The U.K. are mate, they’ve let 0 vaccines out of the 1 U.K. plant. 3 others in the EU are supplying 75% of U.K. AZ doses. If the EU did what the U.K. are doing AZ supply in the U.K. is cut by 75%, that’s just AZ. Imagine it did the same with Pfizer and Jansen (Belgium) when it’s approved. Half the U.K. doses so far C’s,e from the EU.

So 75% of the UKs production of AZ comes from the EU, AZ contractual obligation to the EU is down 75% this quarter.

That just AZ. If the EU was to export the same U.K. does vaccine wise or took the same approach as the U.K. AZ supply would be cut 75%, vaccine supply would be halved. As for the long term, nothing surer then that not remaking the stays que as rounds of this go forward, should never bite the hand that feeds you, very short sighted, takes the gloss of the U.K. roll out for me which has been brilliant, when a light is shown on the supply chain and dynamics.

In this instance, eating cake won’t soon be forgotten, unfortunately.

Can you tell me how the U.K. are forbidding it’s export. It is not subject to export control, so unless you believe the U.K. has armed guards surrounding the........what am I thinking, of course you do.....

 

[BlueToff]

sorry for dual reply posting but to add to my point above about when these second doses would be given:



(from here - https://www.england.nhs.uk/coronavi...d-dose-of-covid-19-vaccinations-11-jan-21.pdf )

Okay mate, that's fine. But right now, there are definitely people getting it sooner.

It's all depending on availability, even seems area differs too. My mate got a text telling him when and where to go - and then he got told his second date once he got his first jab.

My mum and dad have both had letters with codes to go and book both of their dates online (dad has a 10 week gap, mum has a 9).

So, I think the 'confusion' will be that those early people who got jabbed and then moved to 12 weeks' spacing will obviously at the time, by and large, not have been given an exact date. The onus on the logistics is ensuring those are now getting the second jab - and they all will get one.

However, probably because of manufacture/availability, the likelihood is that most will have to wait the full 12 weeks. Whereas, people getting the first jab now or in the last/next few weeks - they probably know with much more certainty that there are going to be the certain amounts at certain times, so they can reduce that spacing if possible, which is a good thing.

 

[davek]

No. It doesnt.

Lets say, to make this understandable, and what we do know about this thing, we opened up tomorrow.

Folk who have had 2 jabs would be better protected than most.

Folk who had a first jab more than 3 weeks ago would be protected a little bit less.

Folk who had a first jab less than 3 weeks ago might not be protected at all.

Folk who had no jab, would be the most likely to have zero protection.

But no one would be 100% protected.

He was asked what would happen if we did that. Reopen now/quicker. That was what he responded to.

Then, to make it crystal clear, if he was asked what would happen if we continued this data driven, slow, cautious reopen, his answer would have been the ones in black.

That's a repackaging (your repackaging) of what these government spokesmen have been saying since the vaccines were rolled out. They have underscored that even if the vaccines dont give 100% protection from contracting the virus a level of safety from serious illness would be assured (and others have repeated these claims...and we see the effect it has on forum's like this).

Now, I obviously understand that cant be an assurance that every single vulnerable person who gets a vaccine can be guaranteed not to die; however, Whitty's comment implied strongly that - in any surge - we could expect tens of thousands of deaths amongst not only those who hadn't taken a vaccine, but also those who had but the vaccine 'hadn't taken' to them.

As said: goalposts shifted. There is no question of that. It was an attempt to slide some new position in there and get away without elaborating. That Parliamentary sub-committee failed to do its job. Whitty should be made to spell out exactly what he meant.

 

[Nymzee]

Made my mum’s night reminding her we can have a sort-of-family BBQ in a couple of weeks for the second part of Stage 1. She thought it wasn’t until mid April we could do it. Seems the roadmap isn’t as clear to everyone.

 

[Neiler]

Can you tell me how the U.K. are forbidding it’s export. It is not subject to export control, so unless you believe the U.K. has armed guards surrounding the........what am I thinking, of course you do.....

The U.K. has exported 0% of vaccines mate, they are taking anything produced in the U.K. its a de facto ban on exporting, US doing the same. While the EU are producing 75% of the UKs AZ supply and 50% of vaccine doses overall.

If the EU took whatever it produced like the U.K. and had a de facto ban on exports and exported nothing to the U.K., then the U.K. is in trouble on supply and its roll out.

 

[Leylo]

@Leylo sad to here that. The issue seems to be that at the start of this process it really wasn't at all like it is now. It was all done over the phone/invitation, whereas now people book in - by and large - themselves online and also book their second jab at the same time.

But, I appreciate the anger, it's not good to make sweeping statements like 'they aren't sticking to 12 weeks'.

My dad's gap is 10 weeks, my mum's gap is 9 (as they've already got their second ones booked in).

The logistics are incredible for this. The issue will be ensuring people who had their jabs at the start when it was more about getting old/vulnerable people (who also may rely on others to get them there, and those others may also have been jabbed too) get theirs. It won't be an 'issue' on a wider scale, but there will be glitches. They'll get it sorted though. It's what they do.

Apparently things are getting mixed up when you go through the gp is what they have been told trying to get it sorted for next week that will be 14 weeks then I reckon .

 

[peteblue]

Pete, it isn't a matter of manufacturing or production - it is a matter of language.

The word "best" means the highest standard, the greatest amount achieveable etc. A company's "best efforts" cannot by definition be "our best Q1 efforts are X" when they subsequently (when challenged) say "actually, our best Q1 efforts are Y".

I mean, even you acknowledge this in that post - if it was possible to do that, then that they didn't do it when they were putting "best efforts" in mean that the first answer cannot have been their "best efforts". If it was, then it wouldn't have been possible to deliver the extra 9 million doses.

I think I’ll have another beer....