Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

[LinekersLegs]

This is crazy. Anyone under 55 in France that had the AZ jab is now going to get an mRNA jab (Pfizer or Moderna) 12 weeks later rather than giving the second dose of AZ. I am not one for vaccine nationalism but I am for governments acting sensibly. 500,000 people affected by this apparently. So at worse based on the numbers 5 people will die if they just carried on. How many will die with this change in course? We also have no evidence at all about how people react after one dose of an adenovirus vaccine and then an mRNA one (or vice versa). Madness

French under-55s given AstraZeneca shot to get different vaccine for second dose

France on Friday said under 55s who received a first injection of the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine should be given a jab from a different producer for their second dose, a ruling affecting more than…

www.france24.com

Iirc France is dealing with a big vaccine hesitancy issue so that probably plays a part but this seems an major overreaction, especially since as you say the new plan involves a dosing regimen we have zero data on.

And when you add in France’s current case rate

 

[LinekersLegs]

Good to hear your both feeling better and protected mate.

I know you know but just as a general PSA
“The Johnson & Johnson vaccine only requires one dose, but it also needs time to reach its full protective power. Don’t consider yourself fully protected until two weeks have passed from your final vaccine (Pfizer and Moderna) or your only vaccine (Johnson & Johnson).”

I’m scheduling lots of long delayed things for early May though

 

[LinekersLegs]

 

[Wizard]

Iirc France is dealing with a big vaccine hesitancy issue so that probably plays a part but this seems an major overreaction, especially since as you say the new plan involves a dosing regimen we have zero data on.

And when you add in France’s current case rate

This is my big worry. It's also why I worry about the messaging around the UK stopping under 30's having the AZ vaccine. It makes sense at the moment for us to do that given we are at least a month out from that age group getting their vaccines. But the messaging is wrong. They framed it as under 30's are less likely to die from covid than having AZ (which you can then sub in any vaccine with that message). While that is true as far as we know at the moment, the stronger messaging should be that we have other vaccines available for the under 30's so it is nothing to worry about.

And that leads onto the more important message on top of that which is that you aren't only taking the vaccine for yourself, you are taking it to protect other more vulnerable people. I'm 35, my chance of getting covid and then dying from it is small. My chance of getting a fatal blood clot from the vaccine is smaller still (I've had the AZ vaccine). But if I don't take the vaccine and I go and see my mum or dad and give them covid the chance of one of us dying is much, much higher. And the likelihood is, it won't be me.

This move by France is just amplifying all these issues. As you say, vaccine hesitancy will increase in a country where it is already higher than we would hope. We move into a situation where we are in uncharted waters with mixing vaccine types. It might be fine, but we just don't know. And putting over 500,000 people in that position is incredibly irresponsible when the current numbers say about 5 people would potentially die due to the blood clots. I have no doubt this move by France will result in more than 5 deaths.

 

[mrb85]

TBF I think that is to draw too much equivalence between what they are saying, as if they might both be right.

I mean, he is (seemingly) honestly stating what his views are; she is not - what she appears to be implying there is that this virus (and possibly all similar threats) should be allowed to do their thing.

We know what allowing this to spread across the country unchallenged would have done; yet she never mentioned it.

Do we? There is absolutely no consensus on this (not that you'd necessarily realise this given the paucity of media coverage afforded to anyone not supporting the government's policy position), particularly if using quantitative data analysis rather than accepting projections from what are consistently found to be flawed models. The government remains reticent about providing anything definitive when asked to statistically prove the efficacy of any of the various measures they have introduced in the last year. As eminent epidemiologist and professor of medicine John Ionnadis said at the very start of the pandemic, what we have been witnessing is an "evidence fiasco", with critical decisions being made without reliable data. And unfortunately since then we have also seen the loudest public voice being given to those not qualified in advanced statistical analysis but nevertheless pronouncing on the key issues of causal correlation in what accurate data we do have.

 

[mrb85]

This is my big worry. It's also why I worry about the messaging around the UK stopping under 30's having the AZ vaccine. It makes sense at the moment for us to do that given we are at least a month out from that age group getting their vaccines. But the messaging is wrong. They framed it as under 30's are less likely to die from covid than having AZ (which you can then sub in any vaccine with that message). While that is true as far as we know at the moment, the stronger messaging should be that we have other vaccines available for the under 30's so it is nothing to worry about.

And that leads onto the more important message on top of that which is that you aren't only taking the vaccine for yourself, you are taking it to protect other more vulnerable people. I'm 35, my chance of getting covid and then dying from it is small. My chance of getting a fatal blood clot from the vaccine is smaller still (I've had the AZ vaccine). But if I don't take the vaccine and I go and see my mum or dad and give them covid the chance of one of us dying is much, much higher. And the likelihood is, it won't be me.

This move by France is just amplifying all these issues. As you say, vaccine hesitancy will increase in a country where it is already higher than we would hope. We move into a situation where we are in uncharted waters with mixing vaccine types. It might be fine, but we just don't know. And putting over 500,000 people in that position is incredibly irresponsible when the current numbers say about 5 people would potentially die due to the blood clots. I have no doubt this move by France will result in more than 5 deaths.

Of course, if your parents had had the vaccine then they too would be far less likely to die from the virus.

 

[tsubaki]

Do we? There is absolutely no consensus on this (not that you'd necessarily realise this given the paucity of media coverage afforded to anyone not supporting the government's policy position), particularly if using quantitative data analysis rather than accepting projections from what are consistently found to be flawed models. The government remains reticent about providing anything definitive when asked to statistically prove the efficacy of any of the various measures they have introduced in the last year. As eminent epidemiologist and professor of medicine John Ionnadis said at the very start of the pandemic, what we have been witnessing is an "evidence fiasco", with critical decisions being made without reliable data. And unfortunately since then we have also seen the loudest public voice being given to those not qualified in advanced statistical analysis but nevertheless pronouncing on the key issues of causal correlation in what accurate data we do have.

There is a lack of data, but if we know anything at all (given that lack) it is what happens when this thing is left unchecked. That part is fairly simple after all; the more people get it the more people get hospitalised or die.

TBF Gupta knows this as well, which is why her argument avoided any mention of the consequences of doing what she suggested, instead making the claim that not doing it was dangerous / economically damaging (which she also framed as only being about lockdowns and border closures).

 

[Goat]

Only two patients being treated for Covid in Wirral hospitals

There are now only two patients being treated for coronavirus in Wirral hospitals, latest figures show.

www.wirralglobe.co.uk

There are now only two patients being treated for coronavirus in Wirral hospitals, latest figures show.

Wirral University Teaching Hospital does not disclose hospital admission numbers for its two main sites, but NHS England publishes the data on a weekly basis.

The most recent report, published today (April 8), shows that on April 6, just two beds at Arrowe Park and Clatterbridge Hospitals were occupied by Covid-19 patients - down six from eight patients seven days earlier.

And on April 2, there was just a single inpatient being treated for the virus in the trust.

 

[Wizard]

Of course, if your parents had had the vaccine then they too would be far less likely to die from the virus.

I see you have taken one bit of my comment which was a hypothetical but not responded to the rest. But I will humour you. My mum is having her second jab on Wednesday and my dad a week after. My dad lives abroad and so has only recently had his first jab.

But that is all beside the point. I was talking about vaccine hesitancy which is a real danger. I would like you to respond to the other points I made, but maybe don't copy and paste from conspiracy theory websites and quote someone like John Ioannides who is a complete quack

 

[Wizard]

Just in case anyone gets hoodwinked by @mrb85 and his rubbish here is an article showing that the "eminent epidemiologist" he quotes is someone you shouldn't listen to.

JetBlue’s Founder Helped Fund A Stanford Study That Said The Coronavirus Wasn’t That Deadly

A Stanford whistleblower complaint alleges that the controversial John Ioannidis study failed to disclose important financial ties and ignored scientists’ concerns that their antibody test was inaccurate.

www.buzzfeednews.com

 

[jinkyali]

Let us know how the side effects differ, if at all, from the first dose mate.

So, side effects for this jab 24 hours on, massively different to the first.

Took me a good couple of days to get over first. Chills, sweats, tired, no energy.

With this one I hardly have anything like that. Felt bit tired last night so went bed about ten pm but that's it.

 

[LinekersLegs]

The Curious Case of Florida’s Pandemic Response

Liberals predicted that Florida would get destroyed by its laissez-faire approach to COVID-19. Conservatives said the state was the future of the economy. What if they were both wrong?

www.theatlantic.com

 

[LinekersLegs]

Long but informative thread

 

[LinekersLegs]

 

[peteblue]

U.K. vaccines.... 557 K jabs yesterday (including 450 K second jabs) ......total first jabs 32,010,244.....total second jabs 6,991,310 ...giving an overall total of 39,001,554.....steady progress....