If news of this vaccine had come a fortnight earlier Trump might just have held on – politicalbettin

System

If news of this vaccine had come a fortnight earlier Trump might just have held on – politicalbetting.com

Breaking NewsModerna Covid19 Vaccine Candidate 94.5% EffectiveMore Efficacious Than Pfizer Vaccine CandidateOperation Warp Speed Another Major Success Market Indicating Huge Upside Move

Read the full story here

FrancisUrquhart

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

FrancisUrquhart

TheScreamingEagles said:

This is going to be so awesome, Apple will make such an awesome success of this, and not the disaster that Samsung made.

A Chinese report claims that Apple has had Foxconn and other suppliers make samples of folding iPhones, and that the devices could be launched as early as 2022.

Both Foxconn and Nippon Nippon have been asked to send samples so that Apple can see how they stand up to more than 100,000 fold operations …

https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/16/folding-iphones-enter-testing-possible-2022-release-claims-chinese-report/

I don't really get the idea of a folding phone. The large screen on my regular phone is more than enough to do phone type stuff and then I have a laptop for doing proper work.

FrancisUrquhart

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

I suspect for the next decade or so the governments will keep things like this active lest Covid-19 mutates.

You can guarantee that the manifestos at the next general election will promise awesome pandemic preparedness.

I think that is fair enough and especially if it improves the overall capabilities of the NHS wider system of testing. My fear is we are going to build a load of testing infrastructure dedicated to just COVID, rather than looking at how we can modernize and increase diagnostic capacity across all diseases.

The reason Germany was able to get their testing up and running better than elsewhere in Europe was they already had a wide network of labs that ran all sorts of tests, which they then used to focus on COVID, not the other way around.

tlg86

Fourth like Oxford...

dr_spyn

I hope that adherents of the former leader will be able to accept SKS's decision.

https://twitter.com/JewishChron/status/1328339353379221512

not_on_fire

FrancisUrquhart said:

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

Yes

Carnyx

FrancisUrquhart said:

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

Becauswe the vaccines will take time to give to everyone; they are not fully effective (so some fol;k are still vulnerable); and we need to stamp out any further outbreaks pdq while R spools down and the virus is eliminated? Also for incoming travellers.

FrancisUrquhart

tlg86 said:

Fourth like Oxford...

You are optimistic....

FrancisUrquhart

Carnyx said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

Becauswe the vaccines will take time to give to everyone; they are not fully effective (so some fol;k are still vulnerable); and we need to stamp out any further outbreaks pdq while R spools down and the virus is eliminated? Also for incoming travellers.

But we aren't using the 500k a day capacity now. And what sort of tests, more PCR tests? As for incoming travellers, we need systems that do the tests at the airport, not in a big lab in Leamington Spa.

Malmesbury

FrancisUrquhart said:

Carnyx said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

Becauswe the vaccines will take time to give to everyone; they are not fully effective (so some fol;k are still vulnerable); and we need to stamp out any further outbreaks pdq while R spools down and the virus is eliminated? Also for incoming travellers.

But we aren't using the 500k a day capacity now. And what sort of tests, more PCR tests? As for incoming travellers, we need systems that do the tests at the airport, not in a big lab in Leamington Spa.

The problem is, quite simply, that people are not volunteering for testing. In the Liverpool trial, where it's free and available to anyone, symptoms or not - not the massive pickup required.

I think that they are preparing for mandatory testing.

FrancisUrquhart

However, the bulk of the UK's testing still uses the standard swab test that need to be analysed in a lab.

Announcing the two new "mega labs", the government said they will use technology to speed up the process - for example through automation and robotics.

"This means more tests will be processed more quickly and at a lower cost, and therefore faster turnaround times for test results," the Department of Health said.

The sites will create up to 4,000 jobs, with the labs also being used to process tests for other illnesses including cancer, cardiovascular and metabolic diseases.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-54953677

So good that these facilities can be used for other illnesses, but bad that it sounds like just faster PCR turn arounds.

Malmesbury

Carnyx said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

Becauswe the vaccines will take time to give to everyone; they are not fully effective (so some fol;k are still vulnerable); and we need to stamp out any further outbreaks pdq while R spools down and the virus is eliminated? Also for incoming travellers.

One question I am trying to get answered - will they use the antibody test capacity we have sitting around, to check the effectiveness of vaccination? In theory, take your jab(s), come back x days later and an antibody test should tell you whether the vaccine has worked...

Anyone know?

LostPassword

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This is going to be so awesome, Apple will make such an awesome success of this, and not the disaster that Samsung made.

A Chinese report claims that Apple has had Foxconn and other suppliers make samples of folding iPhones, and that the devices could be launched as early as 2022.

Both Foxconn and Nippon Nippon have been asked to send samples so that Apple can see how they stand up to more than 100,000 fold operations …

https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/16/folding-iphones-enter-testing-possible-2022-release-claims-chinese-report/

I don't really get the idea of a folding phone. The large screen on my regular phone is more than enough to do phone type stuff and then I have a laptop for doing proper work.

I guess the idea is so that your phone can be folded so that it takes up less space when not in use, and protects the screen by virtue of being folded.

If it works well enough I'd expect all phones to be folding phones, eventually.

FrancisUrquhart

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Carnyx said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

Becauswe the vaccines will take time to give to everyone; they are not fully effective (so some fol;k are still vulnerable); and we need to stamp out any further outbreaks pdq while R spools down and the virus is eliminated? Also for incoming travellers.

But we aren't using the 500k a day capacity now. And what sort of tests, more PCR tests? As for incoming travellers, we need systems that do the tests at the airport, not in a big lab in Leamington Spa.

The problem is, quite simply, that people are not volunteering for testing. In the Liverpool trial, where it's free and available to anyone, symptoms or not - not the massive pickup required.

I think that they are preparing for mandatory testing.

18,000 in the first week is piss poor. Why wouldn't you go and get a free test? Seems a no brainer to me, especially if you come into contact with vulnerable people.

Anabobazina

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This is going to be so awesome, Apple will make such an awesome success of this, and not the disaster that Samsung made.

A Chinese report claims that Apple has had Foxconn and other suppliers make samples of folding iPhones, and that the devices could be launched as early as 2022.

Both Foxconn and Nippon Nippon have been asked to send samples so that Apple can see how they stand up to more than 100,000 fold operations …

https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/16/folding-iphones-enter-testing-possible-2022-release-claims-chinese-report/

I don't really get the idea of a folding phone. The large screen on my regular phone is more than enough to do phone type stuff and then I have a laptop for doing proper work.

Quite, it's another gimmick by phone companies to get people to fork out silly money for a new model.

I have been using a iPhone 6s Plus 128GB for years, I just change the battery every so often.

It does everything I need, and even has a great feature – a 3.5mm audio port, so I know I can play my music pretty much wherever I am.

What is the point of paying £££ on a new phone when the 6s Plus is fine?

dixiedean

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Carnyx said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

Becauswe the vaccines will take time to give to everyone; they are not fully effective (so some fol;k are still vulnerable); and we need to stamp out any further outbreaks pdq while R spools down and the virus is eliminated? Also for incoming travellers.

But we aren't using the 500k a day capacity now. And what sort of tests, more PCR tests? As for incoming travellers, we need systems that do the tests at the airport, not in a big lab in Leamington Spa.

The problem is, quite simply, that people are not volunteering for testing. In the Liverpool trial, where it's free and available to anyone, symptoms or not - not the massive pickup required.

I think that they are preparing for mandatory testing.

Liverpool was a curious place to choose. Probably the lowest level of trust in the government in England. Any reason why?

FrancisUrquhart

Anabobazina said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This is going to be so awesome, Apple will make such an awesome success of this, and not the disaster that Samsung made.

A Chinese report claims that Apple has had Foxconn and other suppliers make samples of folding iPhones, and that the devices could be launched as early as 2022.

Both Foxconn and Nippon Nippon have been asked to send samples so that Apple can see how they stand up to more than 100,000 fold operations …

https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/16/folding-iphones-enter-testing-possible-2022-release-claims-chinese-report/

I don't really get the idea of a folding phone. The large screen on my regular phone is more than enough to do phone type stuff and then I have a laptop for doing proper work.

Quite, it's another gimmick by phone companies to get people to fork out silly money for a new model.

I have been using a iPhone 6s Plus 128GB for years, I just change the battery every so often.

It does everything I need, and even has a great feature – a 3.5mm audio port, so I know I can play my music pretty much wherever I am.

What is the point of paying £££ on a new phone when the 6s Plus is fine?

Feels a bit like the big push on trying to get people to buy 3D tvs a few years ago to me....

Anabobazina

The test and trace regime is bonkers.

If you get a test, it's negative, you still have to isolate for a fortnight apparently.

FrancisUrquhart

dixiedean said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Carnyx said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

Becauswe the vaccines will take time to give to everyone; they are not fully effective (so some fol;k are still vulnerable); and we need to stamp out any further outbreaks pdq while R spools down and the virus is eliminated? Also for incoming travellers.

But we aren't using the 500k a day capacity now. And what sort of tests, more PCR tests? As for incoming travellers, we need systems that do the tests at the airport, not in a big lab in Leamington Spa.

The problem is, quite simply, that people are not volunteering for testing. In the Liverpool trial, where it's free and available to anyone, symptoms or not - not the massive pickup required.

I think that they are preparing for mandatory testing.

Liverpool was a curious place to choose. Probably the lowest level of trust in the government in England. Any reason why?

I guess because rates of COVID there were among the highest in the country when they looked for somewhere to roll this out.

Anabobazina

FrancisUrquhart said:

Anabobazina said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This is going to be so awesome, Apple will make such an awesome success of this, and not the disaster that Samsung made.

A Chinese report claims that Apple has had Foxconn and other suppliers make samples of folding iPhones, and that the devices could be launched as early as 2022.

Both Foxconn and Nippon Nippon have been asked to send samples so that Apple can see how they stand up to more than 100,000 fold operations …

https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/16/folding-iphones-enter-testing-possible-2022-release-claims-chinese-report/

I don't really get the idea of a folding phone. The large screen on my regular phone is more than enough to do phone type stuff and then I have a laptop for doing proper work.

Quite, it's another gimmick by phone companies to get people to fork out silly money for a new model.

I have been using a iPhone 6s Plus 128GB for years, I just change the battery every so often.

It does everything I need, and even has a great feature – a 3.5mm audio port, so I know I can play my music pretty much wherever I am.

What is the point of paying £££ on a new phone when the 6s Plus is fine?

Feels a bit like the big push on trying to get people to buy 3D tvs a few years ago to me....

Yup – great analogy.

RochdalePioneers

LostPassword said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This is going to be so awesome, Apple will make such an awesome success of this, and not the disaster that Samsung made.

A Chinese report claims that Apple has had Foxconn and other suppliers make samples of folding iPhones, and that the devices could be launched as early as 2022.

Both Foxconn and Nippon Nippon have been asked to send samples so that Apple can see how they stand up to more than 100,000 fold operations …

https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/16/folding-iphones-enter-testing-possible-2022-release-claims-chinese-report/

I don't really get the idea of a folding phone. The large screen on my regular phone is more than enough to do phone type stuff and then I have a laptop for doing proper work.

I guess the idea is so that your phone can be folded so that it takes up less space when not in use, and protects the screen by virtue of being folded.

If it works well enough I'd expect all phones to be folding phones, eventually.

The idea is simple. The 'sell good phones for spectacular money to fanbois' manufacturers like Apple and Samsung have run out of new innovations to justify the £lots price tag for. So now we're into gimmicks like folding screens or LG's Batwing screen. People will once again pay £daft for such amazing things so make those.

FrancisUrquhart

We are seeing similar things with computer monitors now. First it was 120hz, then 144Hz, which were noticeable improvements, then they went for 240Hz, now 360Hz.....not only can hardly any games run anywhere near that frame rate, your eyes can't pick up the difference. And same with resolution, 1440p, 4k, 5k, 6k....

All because 144Hz 1440p monitor is dirt cheap now.

CarlottaVance

https://twitter.com/BBCJonSopel/status/1328340752057978885?s=20

FrancisUrquhart

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/BBCJonSopel/status/1328340752057978885?s=20

Sopel needs a twitter warning tag...

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1328341927641681922?s=20

Philip_Thompson

POTWAS.

Timing was perfect then.

Alistair

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/BBCJonSopel/status/1328340752057978885?s=20

Sopel needs a twitter warning tag...

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1328341927641681922?s=20

To be fair that was 5 minutes after Sopel tweeted.

ClippP

FrancisUrquhart said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Carnyx said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

Becauswe the vaccines will take time to give to everyone; they are not fully effective (so some fol;k are still vulnerable); and we need to stamp out any further outbreaks pdq while R spools down and the virus is eliminated? Also for incoming travellers.

But we aren't using the 500k a day capacity now. And what sort of tests, more PCR tests? As for incoming travellers, we need systems that do the tests at the airport, not in a big lab in Leamington Spa.

The problem is, quite simply, that people are not volunteering for testing. In the Liverpool trial, where it's free and available to anyone, symptoms or not - not the massive pickup required.

I think that they are preparing for mandatory testing.

18,000 in the first week is piss poor. Why wouldn't you go and get a free test? Seems a no brainer to me, especially if you come into contact with vulnerable people.

It´s obvious to me. If you go and have the test, there is a risk that you will be locked up for a fortnight. If you don´t have the test, you can say you didn´t know, so you are at liberty to go round possibly infecting others, but at least you are innocent.

It is also a question of trust. Nobody trusts this Johnson government. Their stupid testing system is as likely to find you infectious as not, whether you are or not. And if you are infectious, it doesn´t matter really. For example, Cummings, Johnson pere, Johnson fils etc etc.

They just aren´t serious. So it is not a serious problem. QED

kamski

FrancisUrquhart said:

However, the bulk of the UK's testing still uses the standard swab test that need to be analysed in a lab.

Announcing the two new "mega labs", the government said they will use technology to speed up the process - for example through automation and robotics.

"This means more tests will be processed more quickly and at a lower cost, and therefore faster turnaround times for test results," the Department of Health said.

The sites will create up to 4,000 jobs, with the labs also being used to process tests for other illnesses including cancer, cardiovascular and metabolic diseases.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-54953677

So good that these facilities can be used for other illnesses, but bad that it sounds like just faster PCR turn arounds.

will it be faster turnaround times having 2 big megalabs vs more local labs? I would have thought transport times would eat up more than any time savings from using more automation and robotics

FrancisUrquhart

According to this, the EU haven't signed their deal with Moderna...despite talking in August.

The EU, meanwhile, has an 'unsigned' deal for 160 million does.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/world-news/moderna-coronavirus-vaccine-945-per-19287853

RobD

FrancisUrquhart said:

We are seeing similar things with computer monitors now. First it was 120hz, then 144Hz, which were noticeable improvements, then they went for 240Hz, now 360Hz.....not only can hardly any games run anywhere near that frame rate, your eyes can't pick up the difference. And same with resolution, 1440p, 4k, 5k, 6k....

All because 144Hz 1440p monitor is dirt cheap now.

It's all about response time for gaming (and pro excel users, I suppose). You can have a 144Hz monitor and it's still crap because the response time is so slow.

kjh

FrancisUrquhart said:

Anabobazina said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This is going to be so awesome, Apple will make such an awesome success of this, and not the disaster that Samsung made.

A Chinese report claims that Apple has had Foxconn and other suppliers make samples of folding iPhones, and that the devices could be launched as early as 2022.

Both Foxconn and Nippon Nippon have been asked to send samples so that Apple can see how they stand up to more than 100,000 fold operations …

https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/16/folding-iphones-enter-testing-possible-2022-release-claims-chinese-report/

I don't really get the idea of a folding phone. The large screen on my regular phone is more than enough to do phone type stuff and then I have a laptop for doing proper work.

Quite, it's another gimmick by phone companies to get people to fork out silly money for a new model.

I have been using a iPhone 6s Plus 128GB for years, I just change the battery every so often.

It does everything I need, and even has a great feature – a 3.5mm audio port, so I know I can play my music pretty much wherever I am.

What is the point of paying £££ on a new phone when the 6s Plus is fine?

Feels a bit like the big push on trying to get people to buy 3D tvs a few years ago to me....

3D would have been useful if anyone actually broadcasted it (he says bitterly having paid extra for the additional glasses, so the whole family could watch it, that have never left the packaging).

FrancisUrquhart

Alistair said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/BBCJonSopel/status/1328340752057978885?s=20

Sopel needs a twitter warning tag...

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1328341927641681922?s=20

To be fair that was 5 minutes after Sopel tweeted.

I was just joking about the use of twitter inaccuracy tag system.

FrancisUrquhart

kamski said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

However, the bulk of the UK's testing still uses the standard swab test that need to be analysed in a lab.

Announcing the two new "mega labs", the government said they will use technology to speed up the process - for example through automation and robotics.

"This means more tests will be processed more quickly and at a lower cost, and therefore faster turnaround times for test results," the Department of Health said.

The sites will create up to 4,000 jobs, with the labs also being used to process tests for other illnesses including cancer, cardiovascular and metabolic diseases.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-54953677

So good that these facilities can be used for other illnesses, but bad that it sounds like just faster PCR turn arounds.

will it be faster turnaround times having 2 big megalabs vs more local labs? I would have thought transport times would eat up more than any time savings from using more automation and robotics

Well that's a very good question. Also, "single point of failure".

Alistair

Relevant for the previous thread

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1328341060620333058?s=19

Sandpit

Anabobazina said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This is going to be so awesome, Apple will make such an awesome success of this, and not the disaster that Samsung made.

A Chinese report claims that Apple has had Foxconn and other suppliers make samples of folding iPhones, and that the devices could be launched as early as 2022.

Both Foxconn and Nippon Nippon have been asked to send samples so that Apple can see how they stand up to more than 100,000 fold operations …

https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/16/folding-iphones-enter-testing-possible-2022-release-claims-chinese-report/

I don't really get the idea of a folding phone. The large screen on my regular phone is more than enough to do phone type stuff and then I have a laptop for doing proper work.

Quite, it's another gimmick by phone companies to get people to fork out silly money for a new model.

I have been using a iPhone 6s Plus 128GB for years, I just change the battery every so often.

It does everything I need, and even has a great feature – a 3.5mm audio port, so I know I can play my music pretty much wherever I am.

What is the point of paying £££ on a new phone when the 6s Plus is fine?

I’ve an iPhone SE (the original one). My next phone is another SE that I bought at the same time, as I figured they’d keep getting bigger.

I only use it for calls, SMS, and as a hotspot for the iPad which is the main device.

Alistair

Also Coronavirus related

https://twitter.com/freddiesayers/status/1328336583540563969?s=19

Ban on events over 8 people.

Stuartinromford

Philip_Thompson said:

POTWAS.

Timing was perfect then.

Couldn't happen to a nicer chap.

FrancisUrquhart

kjh said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Anabobazina said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This is going to be so awesome, Apple will make such an awesome success of this, and not the disaster that Samsung made.

A Chinese report claims that Apple has had Foxconn and other suppliers make samples of folding iPhones, and that the devices could be launched as early as 2022.

Both Foxconn and Nippon Nippon have been asked to send samples so that Apple can see how they stand up to more than 100,000 fold operations …

https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/16/folding-iphones-enter-testing-possible-2022-release-claims-chinese-report/

I don't really get the idea of a folding phone. The large screen on my regular phone is more than enough to do phone type stuff and then I have a laptop for doing proper work.

Quite, it's another gimmick by phone companies to get people to fork out silly money for a new model.

I have been using a iPhone 6s Plus 128GB for years, I just change the battery every so often.

It does everything I need, and even has a great feature – a 3.5mm audio port, so I know I can play my music pretty much wherever I am.

What is the point of paying £££ on a new phone when the 6s Plus is fine?

Feels a bit like the big push on trying to get people to buy 3D tvs a few years ago to me....

3D would have been useful if anyone actually broadcasted it (he says bitterly having paid extra for the additional glasses, so the whole family could watch it, that have never left the packaging).

They did, there were dedicated 3d sport channels.

Philip_Thompson

dixiedean said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Carnyx said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

Becauswe the vaccines will take time to give to everyone; they are not fully effective (so some fol;k are still vulnerable); and we need to stamp out any further outbreaks pdq while R spools down and the virus is eliminated? Also for incoming travellers.

But we aren't using the 500k a day capacity now. And what sort of tests, more PCR tests? As for incoming travellers, we need systems that do the tests at the airport, not in a big lab in Leamington Spa.

The problem is, quite simply, that people are not volunteering for testing. In the Liverpool trial, where it's free and available to anyone, symptoms or not - not the massive pickup required.

I think that they are preparing for mandatory testing.

Liverpool was a curious place to choose. Probably the lowest level of trust in the government in England. Any reason why?

First place into Tier 3 remember. So high rates and good to squish it there so that when lockdown ends it's not back into Tier 3.

kjh

FrancisUrquhart said:

kjh said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Anabobazina said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This is going to be so awesome, Apple will make such an awesome success of this, and not the disaster that Samsung made.

A Chinese report claims that Apple has had Foxconn and other suppliers make samples of folding iPhones, and that the devices could be launched as early as 2022.

Both Foxconn and Nippon Nippon have been asked to send samples so that Apple can see how they stand up to more than 100,000 fold operations …

https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/16/folding-iphones-enter-testing-possible-2022-release-claims-chinese-report/

I don't really get the idea of a folding phone. The large screen on my regular phone is more than enough to do phone type stuff and then I have a laptop for doing proper work.

Quite, it's another gimmick by phone companies to get people to fork out silly money for a new model.

I have been using a iPhone 6s Plus 128GB for years, I just change the battery every so often.

It does everything I need, and even has a great feature – a 3.5mm audio port, so I know I can play my music pretty much wherever I am.

What is the point of paying £££ on a new phone when the 6s Plus is fine?

Feels a bit like the big push on trying to get people to buy 3D tvs a few years ago to me....

3D would have been useful if anyone actually broadcasted it (he says bitterly having paid extra for the additional glasses, so the whole family could watch it, that have never left the packaging).

They did, there were dedicated 3d sport channels.

Yes I saw them in the shop. American Football as I recall. Never seen them since.

FrancisUrquhart

RobD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

We are seeing similar things with computer monitors now. First it was 120hz, then 144Hz, which were noticeable improvements, then they went for 240Hz, now 360Hz.....not only can hardly any games run anywhere near that frame rate, your eyes can't pick up the difference. And same with resolution, 1440p, 4k, 5k, 6k....

All because 144Hz 1440p monitor is dirt cheap now.

It's all about response time for gaming (and pro excel users, I suppose). You can have a 144Hz monitor and it's still crap because the response time is so slow.

Well yes, but even that, they are all pushing this 1ms response time stuff. But those who actually benefit from this are vanishingly small.

Its the equivalent of people really caring about 99.x% coverage of the adobe or sRGB colour space. Yes, people in high end creative fields, it being 99.9% vs 99.8% is makes some difference, to most people none at all.

CarlottaVance

Interesting report via DHL looking at the logistics of vaccine distribution depending on temperature requirements. High feasibility for:

Stringent temperature control (eg Pfizer): 25 countries/2.5bn people
Conventional temperature control (eg Oxford): 60 Countries/5bn people (an additional 2.5 to the above)

Which leaves 2.8bn people - (mainly Africa, parts of ME) where it will be more challenging:

Exhibit 8:

https://www.dhl.com/content/dam/dhl/global/core/documents/pdf/glo-core-delivering-pandemic-resilience-2020.pdf

RobD

FrancisUrquhart said:

RobD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

We are seeing similar things with computer monitors now. First it was 120hz, then 144Hz, which were noticeable improvements, then they went for 240Hz, now 360Hz.....not only can hardly any games run anywhere near that frame rate, your eyes can't pick up the difference. And same with resolution, 1440p, 4k, 5k, 6k....

All because 144Hz 1440p monitor is dirt cheap now.

It's all about response time for gaming (and pro excel users, I suppose). You can have a 144Hz monitor and it's still crap because the response time is so slow.

Well yes, but even that, they are all pushing this 1ms response time stuff. But those who actually benefit from this are vanishingly small.

Its the equivalent of people really caring about 99.x% coverage of the adobe colour space. Yes, people in high end creative fields, it being 99.9% vs 99.8% is makes some difference, to most people none at all.

And like Domestos.

turbotubbs

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Carnyx said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

Becauswe the vaccines will take time to give to everyone; they are not fully effective (so some fol;k are still vulnerable); and we need to stamp out any further outbreaks pdq while R spools down and the virus is eliminated? Also for incoming travellers.

But we aren't using the 500k a day capacity now. And what sort of tests, more PCR tests? As for incoming travellers, we need systems that do the tests at the airport, not in a big lab in Leamington Spa.

The problem is, quite simply, that people are not volunteering for testing. In the Liverpool trial, where it's free and available to anyone, symptoms or not - not the massive pickup required.

I think that they are preparing for mandatory testing.

Has to be the way ahead. Go door to door and get everyone. Was it Slovenia that has just tested its entire population?

Chris

It's not quite clear that the Moderna vaccine is "more efficacious" than the Pfizer vaccine.

The Pfizer press release says "The case split between vaccinated individuals and those who received the placebo indicates a vaccine efficacy rate above 90%".

The Moderna press release says there were "95 cases, of which 90 cases of COVID-19 were observed in the placebo group versus 5 cases observed in the mRNA-1273 group, resulting in a point estimate of vaccine efficacy of 94.5%"

Those numbers may not be directly comparable, because Pfizer may have calculated a statistical confidence interval, rather just a "point estimate". If so, the observed efficacies would probably be indistinguishable.

FrancisUrquhart

Chris said:

It's not quite clear that the Moderna vaccine is "more efficacious" than the Pfizer vaccine.

The Pfizer press release says "The case split between vaccinated individuals and those who received the placebo indicates a vaccine efficacy rate above 90%".

The Moderna press release says there were "95 cases, of which 90 cases of COVID-19 were observed in the placebo group versus 5 cases observed in the mRNA-1273 group, resulting in a point estimate of vaccine efficacy of 94.5%"

Those numbers may not be directly comparable, because Pfizer may have calculated a statistical confidence interval, rather just a "point estimate". If so, the observed efficacies would probably be indistinguishable.

Why we need to wait for the peer reviewed academic papers based on the full studies.

BluestBlue

Alistair said:

Also Coronavirus related

https://twitter.com/freddiesayers/status/1328336583540563969?s=19

Ban on events over 8 people.

Wait, what? Next they'll be telling us that the law of gravity operates in Sweden too.

glw

kjh said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

kjh said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Anabobazina said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This is going to be so awesome, Apple will make such an awesome success of this, and not the disaster that Samsung made.

A Chinese report claims that Apple has had Foxconn and other suppliers make samples of folding iPhones, and that the devices could be launched as early as 2022.

Both Foxconn and Nippon Nippon have been asked to send samples so that Apple can see how they stand up to more than 100,000 fold operations …

https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/16/folding-iphones-enter-testing-possible-2022-release-claims-chinese-report/

I don't really get the idea of a folding phone. The large screen on my regular phone is more than enough to do phone type stuff and then I have a laptop for doing proper work.

Quite, it's another gimmick by phone companies to get people to fork out silly money for a new model.

I have been using a iPhone 6s Plus 128GB for years, I just change the battery every so often.

It does everything I need, and even has a great feature – a 3.5mm audio port, so I know I can play my music pretty much wherever I am.

What is the point of paying £££ on a new phone when the 6s Plus is fine?

Feels a bit like the big push on trying to get people to buy 3D tvs a few years ago to me....

3D would have been useful if anyone actually broadcasted it (he says bitterly having paid extra for the additional glasses, so the whole family could watch it, that have never left the packaging).

They did, there were dedicated 3d sport channels.

Yes I saw them in the shop. American Football as I recall. Never seen them since.

Sky had some 3d golf, which was cool for about 10 minutes or so, until the glasses became annoying.

FrancisUrquhart

Challenger, champion, change-maker, * - The real Lewis Hamilton story

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/extra/c1nx5lutpg/The-real-Lewis-Hamilton-story

Getting the soap soft treatment for SPOTY.

* tax dodger....

Chris

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Carnyx said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

Becauswe the vaccines will take time to give to everyone; they are not fully effective (so some fol;k are still vulnerable); and we need to stamp out any further outbreaks pdq while R spools down and the virus is eliminated? Also for incoming travellers.

But we aren't using the 500k a day capacity now. And what sort of tests, more PCR tests? As for incoming travellers, we need systems that do the tests at the airport, not in a big lab in Leamington Spa.

The problem is, quite simply, that people are not volunteering for testing. In the Liverpool trial, where it's free and available to anyone, symptoms or not - not the massive pickup required.

I think that they are preparing for mandatory testing.

Has to be the way ahead. Go door to door and get everyone. Was it Slovenia that has just tested its entire population?

Slovakia.

Difficult to keep track of these new-fangled countries.

Malmesbury

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Carnyx said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

Becauswe the vaccines will take time to give to everyone; they are not fully effective (so some fol;k are still vulnerable); and we need to stamp out any further outbreaks pdq while R spools down and the virus is eliminated? Also for incoming travellers.

But we aren't using the 500k a day capacity now. And what sort of tests, more PCR tests? As for incoming travellers, we need systems that do the tests at the airport, not in a big lab in Leamington Spa.

The problem is, quite simply, that people are not volunteering for testing. In the Liverpool trial, where it's free and available to anyone, symptoms or not - not the massive pickup required.

I think that they are preparing for mandatory testing.

Has to be the way ahead. Go door to door and get everyone. Was it Slovenia that has just tested its entire population?

The stick that Slovenia used was interesting - everyone got a envelope with the results. Those who got the all clear had to show it to their employer. Who would get massive fines for employees at work without the all clear certificate.

Plus the police were stopping people in the street to check their certificates....

FrancisUrquhart

I saw the "great reset" trending on twitter, I thought it was all about Boris clear out of Cummings and his eco-warrior stuff. Apparently it is the latest COVID conspiracy theory.

FrancisUrquhart

London and the SE really not seeing much during this second wave. Where as Lombardy in Italy, being smashed again.

https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1328340903120007169?s=20

BluestBlue

Laugh-out-loud comedy from Owen Jones here:

https://twitter.com/0Iangardner2/status/1328275383406514176

rcs1000

"More efficacious" - surely "based on a very small sample size, it appears that the Moderna vaccine may be very slightly more efficacious than the Pfizer/BioNTech one."

FrancisUrquhart

BluestBlue said:

Laugh-out-loud comedy from Owen Jones here:

twitter.com/0Iangardner2/status/1328275383406514176

Why have the Guardian shuttered his original YouTube stuff?

His videos so far on his YouTube channel are getting piss poor number of views. Somebody with so many social media followers and national newspaper column should really be able to get more than a few 1000 views per video, when things like a bearded man doing food challenges can get 500k per video and even a man teaching the French, English swear words, to use against the French government for messing up COVID response does more views.

Sandpit

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Carnyx said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

Becauswe the vaccines will take time to give to everyone; they are not fully effective (so some fol;k are still vulnerable); and we need to stamp out any further outbreaks pdq while R spools down and the virus is eliminated? Also for incoming travellers.

But we aren't using the 500k a day capacity now. And what sort of tests, more PCR tests? As for incoming travellers, we need systems that do the tests at the airport, not in a big lab in Leamington Spa.

The problem is, quite simply, that people are not volunteering for testing. In the Liverpool trial, where it's free and available to anyone, symptoms or not - not the massive pickup required.

I think that they are preparing for mandatory testing.

Has to be the way ahead. Go door to door and get everyone. Was it Slovenia that has just tested its entire population?

That’s what they did here in the UAE in April. There’s lots of quite high-density accommodation areas here, usually full of construction, factory, hospitality and retail workers. They went door-to-door through these areas testing everyone, and removed anyone testing positive to a field hospital. They also made it very clear that they weren’t interested in immigration offences or any other minor misdemeanours, only in stopping the virus spreading. Worked well.

MrEd

BluestBlue said:

Laugh-out-loud comedy from Owen Jones here:

https://twitter.com/0Iangardner2/status/1328275383406514176

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_68RwJyzkA

Chris

rcs1000 said:

"More efficacious" - surely "based on a very small sample size, it appears that the Moderna vaccine may be very slightly more efficacious than the Pfizer/BioNTech one."

No, because what Pfizer may be saying, in effect, is that the statistical confidence interval for the efficacy is about 90-100%. In which case the Moderna result would fall in the middle of that range, and if you calculated a confidence interval from it, it would be very similar.

Malmesbury

Sandpit said:

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Carnyx said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

Becauswe the vaccines will take time to give to everyone; they are not fully effective (so some fol;k are still vulnerable); and we need to stamp out any further outbreaks pdq while R spools down and the virus is eliminated? Also for incoming travellers.

But we aren't using the 500k a day capacity now. And what sort of tests, more PCR tests? As for incoming travellers, we need systems that do the tests at the airport, not in a big lab in Leamington Spa.

The problem is, quite simply, that people are not volunteering for testing. In the Liverpool trial, where it's free and available to anyone, symptoms or not - not the massive pickup required.

I think that they are preparing for mandatory testing.

Has to be the way ahead. Go door to door and get everyone. Was it Slovenia that has just tested its entire population?

That’s what they did here in the UAE in April. There’s lots of quite high-density accommodation areas here, usually full of construction, factory, hospitality and retail workers. They went door-to-door through these areas testing everyone, and removed anyone testing positive to a field hospital. They also made it very clear that they weren’t interested in immigration offences or any other minor misdemeanours, only in stopping the virus spreading. Worked well.

Slovakia used heavy fines for (in effect) not being tested.

CarlottaVance

Today's Captain Hindsight award goes to.....

https://twitter.com/t_wainwright/status/1328353264744673280?s=20

glw

FrancisUrquhart said:

BluestBlue said:

Laugh-out-loud comedy from Owen Jones here:

twitter.com/0Iangardner2/status/1328275383406514176

Why have the Guardian shuttered his original YouTube stuff?

His videos so far on his YouTube channel are getting piss poor number of views. Somebody with so many social media followers and national newspaper column should really be able to get more than a few 1000 views per video, when things like a bearded man doing food challenges can get 500k per video and even a man teaching the French, English swear words, to use against the French government for messing up COVID response does more views.

Traditional media seems to struggle to get large numbers of online viewers on the likes of YouTube, whereas there are some online-only or online-first creators who get huge numbers of viewers. And they aren't shoddy operations any more, they have some impressive fliming setups, with huge rented warehouses used as studios, and lots of technical support. You have gamers, people doing stunts and tricks, people doing reviews and the like, getting millions of views per video, far more than their traditional competitors, and they receive lots of sponsorship and advertising.

Carnyx

FrancisUrquhart said:

BluestBlue said:

Laugh-out-loud comedy from Owen Jones here:

twitter.com/0Iangardner2/status/1328275383406514176

Why have the Guardian shuttered his original YouTube stuff?

His videos so far on his YouTube channel are getting piss poor number of views. Somebody with so many social media followers and national newspaper column should really be able to get more than a few 1000 views per video, when things like a bearded man doing food challenges can get 500k per video and even a man teaching the French, English swear words, to use against the French government for messing up COVID response does more views.

Why bother to sit and watch when one can speedread a Graun article (or glance at a tweet)?

Philip_Thompson

FrancisUrquhart said:

BluestBlue said:

Laugh-out-loud comedy from Owen Jones here:

twitter.com/0Iangardner2/status/1328275383406514176

Why have the Guardian shuttered his original YouTube stuff?

His videos so far on his YouTube channel are getting piss poor number of views. Somebody with so many social media followers and national newspaper column should really be able to get more than a few 1000 views per video, when things like a bearded man doing food challenges can get 500k per video and even a man teaching the French, English swear words, to use against the French government for messing up COVID response does more views.

Perhaps because food challenges are entertaining while Jones on the other hand ...

Sandpit

CarlottaVance said:

Today's Captain Hindsight award goes to.....

https://twitter.com/t_wainwright/status/1328353264744673280?s=20

Hacks have collectively had a terrible year, haven’t they?

TOPPING

BluestBlue said:

Laugh-out-loud comedy from Owen Jones here:

https://twitter.com/0Iangardner2/status/1328275383406514176

He should have closed his Ocado tab before filming. Not 100% great for his man of the people schtick.

Theuniondivvie

LostPassword said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This is going to be so awesome, Apple will make such an awesome success of this, and not the disaster that Samsung made.

A Chinese report claims that Apple has had Foxconn and other suppliers make samples of folding iPhones, and that the devices could be launched as early as 2022.

Both Foxconn and Nippon Nippon have been asked to send samples so that Apple can see how they stand up to more than 100,000 fold operations …

https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/16/folding-iphones-enter-testing-possible-2022-release-claims-chinese-report/

I don't really get the idea of a folding phone. The large screen on my regular phone is more than enough to do phone type stuff and then I have a laptop for doing proper work.

I guess the idea is so that your phone can be folded so that it takes up less space when not in use, and protects the screen by virtue of being folded.

If it works well enough I'd expect all phones to be folding phones, eventually.

We all know it's for Star Trek impressions.

turbotubbs

FrancisUrquhart said:

Chris said:

It's not quite clear that the Moderna vaccine is "more efficacious" than the Pfizer vaccine.

The Pfizer press release says "The case split between vaccinated individuals and those who received the placebo indicates a vaccine efficacy rate above 90%".

The Moderna press release says there were "95 cases, of which 90 cases of COVID-19 were observed in the placebo group versus 5 cases observed in the mRNA-1273 group, resulting in a point estimate of vaccine efficacy of 94.5%"

Those numbers may not be directly comparable, because Pfizer may have calculated a statistical confidence interval, rather just a "point estimate". If so, the observed efficacies would probably be indistinguishable.

Why we need to wait for the peer reviewed academic papers based on the full studies.

I'm not sure approval will be waiting on peer reviewed papers. They will submit their evidence to the regulatory authorities for a decision (in UK MHRA). The evidence will be looked at by experts there. Of course I am sure papers will be published, but not as part of getting it into use.

geoffw

rcs1000 said:

"More efficacious" - surely "based on a very small sample size, it appears that the Moderna vaccine may be very slightly more efficacious than the Pfizer/BioNTech one."

"Most efficacious" © Lily the Pink.

rpjs

Chris said:

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Carnyx said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Two new "mega labs" will open in early 2021 to try to double the UK's daily coronavirus testing capacity, the government has said. The sites - at Leamington Spa in the Midlands and another at an unconfirmed site in Scotland - will increase testing capacity by 600,000.

That's great, but will we need a capacity of a million tests a day in a few months time?

Becauswe the vaccines will take time to give to everyone; they are not fully effective (so some fol;k are still vulnerable); and we need to stamp out any further outbreaks pdq while R spools down and the virus is eliminated? Also for incoming travellers.

But we aren't using the 500k a day capacity now. And what sort of tests, more PCR tests? As for incoming travellers, we need systems that do the tests at the airport, not in a big lab in Leamington Spa.

The problem is, quite simply, that people are not volunteering for testing. In the Liverpool trial, where it's free and available to anyone, symptoms or not - not the massive pickup required.

I think that they are preparing for mandatory testing.

Has to be the way ahead. Go door to door and get everyone. Was it Slovenia that has just tested its entire population?

Slovakia.

Difficult to keep track of these new-fangled countries.

Especially when the Slovak for "Slovakia" is "Slovensko"

FrancisUrquhart

TOPPING said:

BluestBlue said:

Laugh-out-loud comedy from Owen Jones here:

https://twitter.com/0Iangardner2/status/1328275383406514176

He should have closed his Ocado tab before filming. Not 100% great for his man of the people schtick.

Nothing too good for the weerrrrkers.

Roy_G_Biv

Alistair said:

Also Coronavirus related

https://twitter.com/freddiesayers/status/1328336583540563969?s=19

Ban on events over 8 people.

Brillo / hot salty tears / blue and yellow facepaint running.

TimT

Anabobazina said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This is going to be so awesome, Apple will make such an awesome success of this, and not the disaster that Samsung made.

A Chinese report claims that Apple has had Foxconn and other suppliers make samples of folding iPhones, and that the devices could be launched as early as 2022.

Both Foxconn and Nippon Nippon have been asked to send samples so that Apple can see how they stand up to more than 100,000 fold operations …

https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/16/folding-iphones-enter-testing-possible-2022-release-claims-chinese-report/

I don't really get the idea of a folding phone. The large screen on my regular phone is more than enough to do phone type stuff and then I have a laptop for doing proper work.

Quite, it's another gimmick by phone companies to get people to fork out silly money for a new model.

I have been using a iPhone 6s Plus 128GB for years, I just change the battery every so often.

It does everything I need, and even has a great feature – a 3.5mm audio port, so I know I can play my music pretty much wherever I am.

What is the point of paying £££ on a new phone when the 6s Plus is fine?

I will upgrade to the iPhone 12 Pro or Pro Max, not because it has additional or notably better phone features, but because it has a notably better camera, which may well obviate me taking a camera with me on most of my travels.

FrancisUrquhart

glw said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

BluestBlue said:

Laugh-out-loud comedy from Owen Jones here:

twitter.com/0Iangardner2/status/1328275383406514176

Why have the Guardian shuttered his original YouTube stuff?

His videos so far on his YouTube channel are getting piss poor number of views. Somebody with so many social media followers and national newspaper column should really be able to get more than a few 1000 views per video, when things like a bearded man doing food challenges can get 500k per video and even a man teaching the French, English swear words, to use against the French government for messing up COVID response does more views.

Traditional media seems to struggle to get large numbers of online viewers on the likes of YouTube, whereas there are some online-only or online-first creators who get huge numbers of viewers. And they aren't shoddy operations any more, they have some impressive fliming setups, with huge rented warehouses used as studios, and lots of technical support. You have gamers, people doing stunts and tricks, people doing reviews and the like, getting millions of views per video, far more than their traditional competitors, and they receive lots of sponsorship and advertising.

Many are ahead of traditional media now. Linus Tech Tips, not only superior content, but all videos in 4k.

The other problem is lots of traditional media seem to think all they need to do is clip up bits from their over the air programme and upload to YouTube. If I wanted to watch Newsnight, I would want it on the telly box or iPlayer, having clips from the same show on YouTube, the odd one might go viral via some tweet, but in general people that doesn't work.

Malmesbury

turbotubbs said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Chris said:

It's not quite clear that the Moderna vaccine is "more efficacious" than the Pfizer vaccine.

The Pfizer press release says "The case split between vaccinated individuals and those who received the placebo indicates a vaccine efficacy rate above 90%".

The Moderna press release says there were "95 cases, of which 90 cases of COVID-19 were observed in the placebo group versus 5 cases observed in the mRNA-1273 group, resulting in a point estimate of vaccine efficacy of 94.5%"

Those numbers may not be directly comparable, because Pfizer may have calculated a statistical confidence interval, rather just a "point estimate". If so, the observed efficacies would probably be indistinguishable.

Why we need to wait for the peer reviewed academic papers based on the full studies.

I'm not sure approval will be waiting on peer reviewed papers. They will submit their evidence to the regulatory authorities for a decision (in UK MHRA). The evidence will be looked at by experts there. Of course I am sure papers will be published, but not as part of getting it into use.

Given what you can get through peer review for publication.... I think the regulators have my confidence, not the publications.

Selebian

Chris said:

rcs1000 said:

"More efficacious" - surely "based on a very small sample size, it appears that the Moderna vaccine may be very slightly more efficacious than the Pfizer/BioNTech one."

No, because what Pfizer may be saying, in effect, is that the statistical confidence interval for the efficacy is about 90-100%. In which case the Moderna result would fall in the middle of that range, and if you calculated a confidence interval from it, it would be very similar.

Have you got any links to a statement along those lines?

I've be surprised (a) if the confidence interval was that narrow* and (b) that Pfizer wouldn't have publicised their point estimate, if much higher than 90% (I took it from the publicity that the point estimate was just over 90%)

*I'd need size of both arms for both vaccines to estimate, but the 'uncertainty' in the number infected in the vaccinated group will be quite high (and there's also lesser uncertainty in the control group). Say - clutching numbers from thin air - that 10 in 20000 vaccine recipients got infected, the 95% CI for a population estimate from that alone is around 4-16 people per 20000. Say a control arm of 20000 with 90 infections, your point estimate is 89% effective, but a very crude estimate of 95%CI from uncertainty in the vaccinated group alone is 82-96% effective. That's an underestimate because there is also uncertainty in the number of infections in the control group (and maybe other design uncertainties, different populations, different exposures etc to take into account)

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Urquhart, Hamilton isn't a tax dodger, and he's far from the first F1 driver to shift to Monaco.

His self-righteousness and jumping on the BLM bandwagon is tedious, as is the virtue signalling of some sports coverage (on a rare occasion I saw some Sky preamble and it was along the lines of "We make no apology for talking about etc etc". They should've, I watch F1 for the F1, not political commentary).

Still, next year we get the virtuous man and sport in China, land of concentration camps, and Saudi Arabia, where homosexuals are subjected to death. Can't wait for the political comments on that. And yet, I feel I they might not happen. Just a hunch.

turbotubbs

Malmesbury said:

turbotubbs said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Chris said:

It's not quite clear that the Moderna vaccine is "more efficacious" than the Pfizer vaccine.

The Pfizer press release says "The case split between vaccinated individuals and those who received the placebo indicates a vaccine efficacy rate above 90%".

The Moderna press release says there were "95 cases, of which 90 cases of COVID-19 were observed in the placebo group versus 5 cases observed in the mRNA-1273 group, resulting in a point estimate of vaccine efficacy of 94.5%"

Those numbers may not be directly comparable, because Pfizer may have calculated a statistical confidence interval, rather just a "point estimate". If so, the observed efficacies would probably be indistinguishable.

Why we need to wait for the peer reviewed academic papers based on the full studies.

I'm not sure approval will be waiting on peer reviewed papers. They will submit their evidence to the regulatory authorities for a decision (in UK MHRA). The evidence will be looked at by experts there. Of course I am sure papers will be published, but not as part of getting it into use.

Given what you can get through peer review for publication.... I think the regulators have my confidence, not the publications.

Quite. I know a few people who either are or have been at MHRA, and they are not the type to have the wool pulled over their eyes. One in particular (not on a vaccine area) is still our go to guy for manuscript checking. Its his superpower to spot mistakes (from typos, to stuff that doesn;t make sense, to dodgy bits of data we were hoping to sneak through...)

Morris_Dancer

As an aside, when I had to source references when writing up stuff at university, my favourite ever was a genuine source I found proving that black is darker than white. Thanks, scientists!

Well, either that or a lorry driving study that didn't actually study lorry drivers but asked participants to imagine they were lorry drivers.

How that got through I'll never know.

Carnyx

Morris_Dancer said:

As an aside, when I had to source references when writing up stuff at university, my favourite ever was a genuine source I found proving that black is darker than white. Thanks, scientists!

Well, either that or a lorry driving study that didn't actually study lorry drivers but asked participants to imagine they were lorry drivers.

How that got through I'll never know.

On the other hand, black bodies emit more light than white, IIRC ...

FrancisUrquhart

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Urquhart, Hamilton isn't a tax dodger, and he's far from the first F1 driver to shift to Monaco.

His self-righteousness and jumping on the BLM bandwagon is tedious, as is the virtue signalling of some sports coverage (on a rare occasion I saw some Sky preamble and it was along the lines of "We make no apology for talking about etc etc". They should've, I watch F1 for the F1, not political commentary).

Still, next year we get the virtuous man and sport in China, land of concentration camps, and Saudi Arabia, where homosexuals are subjected to death. Can't wait for the political comments on that. And yet, I feel I they might not happen. Just a hunch.

Is funny how so many sports / sports people very outspoken about human rights until its comes to China.

The NBA are the worst, all the BLM slogans on the jerseys stuff, one GM wrote one tweet saying he was with the Hong Kong protestors and they forced him to delete the tweet, had to humbly apologize and they sent out all the biggest stars to say how absolutely wonderful China was. It was like he had tweeted support for the KKK.

Malmesbury

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

turbotubbs said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Chris said:

It's not quite clear that the Moderna vaccine is "more efficacious" than the Pfizer vaccine.

The Pfizer press release says "The case split between vaccinated individuals and those who received the placebo indicates a vaccine efficacy rate above 90%".

The Moderna press release says there were "95 cases, of which 90 cases of COVID-19 were observed in the placebo group versus 5 cases observed in the mRNA-1273 group, resulting in a point estimate of vaccine efficacy of 94.5%"

Those numbers may not be directly comparable, because Pfizer may have calculated a statistical confidence interval, rather just a "point estimate". If so, the observed efficacies would probably be indistinguishable.

Why we need to wait for the peer reviewed academic papers based on the full studies.

I'm not sure approval will be waiting on peer reviewed papers. They will submit their evidence to the regulatory authorities for a decision (in UK MHRA). The evidence will be looked at by experts there. Of course I am sure papers will be published, but not as part of getting it into use.

Given what you can get through peer review for publication.... I think the regulators have my confidence, not the publications.

Quite. I know a few people who either are or have been at MHRA, and they are not the type to have the wool pulled over their eyes. One in particular (not on a vaccine area) is still our go to guy for manuscript checking. Its his superpower to spot mistakes (from typos, to stuff that doesn;t make sense, to dodgy bits of data we were hoping to sneak through...)

As opposed to publication where throughput seems to be the demand these days.

Given the lack of comeback for failures in peer reviewing papers - Wakefield anyone? - versus what would happen if the regulator stuffs up...

It's all about incentives - publish shite, nothing seems to happen. The regulators are looking at career ending events, if they screw up.

kinabalu

BluestBlue said:

Laugh-out-loud comedy from Owen Jones here:

https://twitter.com/0Iangardner2/status/1328275383406514176

I'm reading his new book. Not as good as "Chavs" or "Establishment" but a workmanlike and interesting account of the Corbyn project from the inside. Smacks of honesty rather than gloss. He's particularly tough on Milne. On certain others too including Corbyn himself. Johnny Mac is clearly the guy he really rates.

It's called This Land: The Story of a Movement. No pictures.

OldKingCole

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

turbotubbs said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Chris said:

It's not quite clear that the Moderna vaccine is "more efficacious" than the Pfizer vaccine.

The Pfizer press release says "The case split between vaccinated individuals and those who received the placebo indicates a vaccine efficacy rate above 90%".

The Moderna press release says there were "95 cases, of which 90 cases of COVID-19 were observed in the placebo group versus 5 cases observed in the mRNA-1273 group, resulting in a point estimate of vaccine efficacy of 94.5%"

Those numbers may not be directly comparable, because Pfizer may have calculated a statistical confidence interval, rather just a "point estimate". If so, the observed efficacies would probably be indistinguishable.

Why we need to wait for the peer reviewed academic papers based on the full studies.

I'm not sure approval will be waiting on peer reviewed papers. They will submit their evidence to the regulatory authorities for a decision (in UK MHRA). The evidence will be looked at by experts there. Of course I am sure papers will be published, but not as part of getting it into use.

Given what you can get through peer review for publication.... I think the regulators have my confidence, not the publications.

Quite. I know a few people who either are or have been at MHRA, and they are not the type to have the wool pulled over their eyes. One in particular (not on a vaccine area) is still our go to guy for manuscript checking. Its his superpower to spot mistakes (from typos, to stuff that doesn;t make sense, to dodgy bits of data we were hoping to sneak through...)

One of the reasons why the MHRA/EMA split was such a worry.Not a lot of those guys (or gals) about. Did the UK ones stay with MHRA or go to Amsterdam?

geoffw

  

Carnyx said:

Morris_Dancer said:

As an aside, when I had to source references when writing up stuff at university, my favourite ever was a genuine source I found proving that black is darker than white. Thanks, scientists!

Well, either that or a lorry driving study that didn't actually study lorry drivers but asked participants to imagine they were lorry drivers.

How that got through I'll never know.

On the other hand, black bodies emit more light than white, IIRC ...

I don't think so.

TheScreamingEagles

TOPPING said:

BluestBlue said:

Laugh-out-loud comedy from Owen Jones here:

https://twitter.com/0Iangardner2/status/1328275383406514176

He should have closed his Ocado tab before filming. Not 100% great for his man of the people schtick.

I order from Ocada, as well as Sainsbury's, and Fortnum & Mason, and I'm a man of the people.

Malmesbury

FrancisUrquhart said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Urquhart, Hamilton isn't a tax dodger, and he's far from the first F1 driver to shift to Monaco.

His self-righteousness and jumping on the BLM bandwagon is tedious, as is the virtue signalling of some sports coverage (on a rare occasion I saw some Sky preamble and it was along the lines of "We make no apology for talking about etc etc". They should've, I watch F1 for the F1, not political commentary).

Still, next year we get the virtuous man and sport in China, land of concentration camps, and Saudi Arabia, where homosexuals are subjected to death. Can't wait for the political comments on that. And yet, I feel I they might not happen. Just a hunch.

Is funny how so many sports / sports people very outspoken about human rights until its comes to China.

The NBA are the worst, all the BLM slogans on the jerseys stuff, one GM wrote one tweet saying he was with the Hong Kong protestors and they forced him to delete the tweet, forced to apologize and they sent out all the biggest stars to say how absolutely wonderful China was. It was like he had tweeted support for the KKK.

LeBron James was very enthusiastic about treading on anyone who said anything about HK.

Sandpit

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Urquhart, Hamilton isn't a tax dodger, and he's far from the first F1 driver to shift to Monaco.

His self-righteousness and jumping on the BLM bandwagon is tedious, as is the virtue signalling of some sports coverage (on a rare occasion I saw some Sky preamble and it was along the lines of "We make no apology for talking about etc etc". They should've, I watch F1 for the F1, not political commentary).

Still, next year we get the virtuous man and sport in China, land of concentration camps, and Saudi Arabia, where homosexuals are subjected to death. Can't wait for the political comments on that. And yet, I feel I they might not happen. Just a hunch.

He touched on some of that, in a measured way, in his interview yesterday. I thought it was actually very good. He’s toned down the BLM stuff quite a bit, since he overstepped the mark with a t-shirt on the podium. .
https://youtube.com/watch?v=DXwlhmJBkIY

Competitors in global touring sports have of course been living in Monaco for decades!

TheScreamingEagles

I'm never touching Owen's bell, you might never know where it might end.

OldKingCole

Malmesbury said:

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

turbotubbs said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Chris said:

It's not quite clear that the Moderna vaccine is "more efficacious" than the Pfizer vaccine.

The Pfizer press release says "The case split between vaccinated individuals and those who received the placebo indicates a vaccine efficacy rate above 90%".

The Moderna press release says there were "95 cases, of which 90 cases of COVID-19 were observed in the placebo group versus 5 cases observed in the mRNA-1273 group, resulting in a point estimate of vaccine efficacy of 94.5%"

Those numbers may not be directly comparable, because Pfizer may have calculated a statistical confidence interval, rather just a "point estimate". If so, the observed efficacies would probably be indistinguishable.

Why we need to wait for the peer reviewed academic papers based on the full studies.

I'm not sure approval will be waiting on peer reviewed papers. They will submit their evidence to the regulatory authorities for a decision (in UK MHRA). The evidence will be looked at by experts there. Of course I am sure papers will be published, but not as part of getting it into use.

Given what you can get through peer review for publication.... I think the regulators have my confidence, not the publications.

Quite. I know a few people who either are or have been at MHRA, and they are not the type to have the wool pulled over their eyes. One in particular (not on a vaccine area) is still our go to guy for manuscript checking. Its his superpower to spot mistakes (from typos, to stuff that doesn;t make sense, to dodgy bits of data we were hoping to sneak through...)

As opposed to publication where throughput seems to be the demand these days.

Given the lack of comeback for failures in peer reviewing papers - Wakefield anyone? - versus what would happen if the regulator stuffs up...

It's all about incentives - publish shite, nothing seems to happen. The regulators are looking at career ending events, if they screw up.

Too many departments producing papers, too many Journals.

FrancisUrquhart

TheScreamingEagles said:

TOPPING said:

BluestBlue said:

Laugh-out-loud comedy from Owen Jones here:

https://twitter.com/0Iangardner2/status/1328275383406514176

He should have closed his Ocado tab before filming. Not 100% great for his man of the people schtick.

I order from Ocada, as well as Sainsbury's, and Fortnum & Mason, and I'm a man of the people.

And I'm a proper Northerner....from Stoke.....

kinabalu

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Urquhart, Hamilton isn't a tax dodger, and he's far from the first F1 driver to shift to Monaco.

His self-righteousness and jumping on the BLM bandwagon is tedious, as is the virtue signalling of some sports coverage (on a rare occasion I saw some Sky preamble and it was along the lines of "We make no apology for talking about etc etc". They should've, I watch F1 for the F1, not political commentary).

Still, next year we get the virtuous man and sport in China, land of concentration camps, and Saudi Arabia, where homosexuals are subjected to death. Can't wait for the political comments on that. And yet, I feel I they might not happen. Just a hunch.

I remember the Russian GP a couple of years ago. Putin hanging out in the ante room after the race and joking around with the podium drivers. Uncomfortable spectacle.

Carnyx

Malmesbury said:

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

turbotubbs said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Chris said:

It's not quite clear that the Moderna vaccine is "more efficacious" than the Pfizer vaccine.

The Pfizer press release says "The case split between vaccinated individuals and those who received the placebo indicates a vaccine efficacy rate above 90%".

The Moderna press release says there were "95 cases, of which 90 cases of COVID-19 were observed in the placebo group versus 5 cases observed in the mRNA-1273 group, resulting in a point estimate of vaccine efficacy of 94.5%"

Those numbers may not be directly comparable, because Pfizer may have calculated a statistical confidence interval, rather just a "point estimate". If so, the observed efficacies would probably be indistinguishable.

Why we need to wait for the peer reviewed academic papers based on the full studies.

I'm not sure approval will be waiting on peer reviewed papers. They will submit their evidence to the regulatory authorities for a decision (in UK MHRA). The evidence will be looked at by experts there. Of course I am sure papers will be published, but not as part of getting it into use.

Given what you can get through peer review for publication.... I think the regulators have my confidence, not the publications.

Quite. I know a few people who either are or have been at MHRA, and they are not the type to have the wool pulled over their eyes. One in particular (not on a vaccine area) is still our go to guy for manuscript checking. Its his superpower to spot mistakes (from typos, to stuff that doesn;t make sense, to dodgy bits of data we were hoping to sneak through...)

As opposed to publication where throughput seems to be the demand these days.

Given the lack of comeback for failures in peer reviewing papers - Wakefield anyone? - versus what would happen if the regulator stuffs up...

It's all about incentives - publish shite, nothing seems to happen. The regulators are looking at career ending events, if they screw up.

Quite. Referees generally don't get paid for doing scientific papers, unless things have changed a lot since I was asked every month or fortnight to referee a paper. Out of the goodness of theirt heart - but it doesn't cut the academic mustard except perhaps as a minor bit in the research engagement element of the Research Assessment Framework or whatever the periodic review of Uk university research is called now.

However there are third party reviewers who, so to speak, do it as an integral part of their research work - the systematic reviewers such as the treatment reviews by the Cochrane Collaboration. No idea if they willbe covering vaccine trials, but getting their teeth into trials generally is part of their bread and butter.

OnlyLivingBoy

Sandpit said:

CarlottaVance said:

Today's Captain Hindsight award goes to.....

https://twitter.com/t_wainwright/status/1328353264744673280?s=20

Hacks have collectively had a terrible year, haven’t they?

Especially the ones running the country.

TheScreamingEagles

I find the term 'tax dodger' really pejorative, my financial advisers call it 'tax minimisation strategies' which is much nicer sounding.

Malmesbury

OldKingCole said:

Malmesbury said:

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

turbotubbs said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Chris said:

It's not quite clear that the Moderna vaccine is "more efficacious" than the Pfizer vaccine.

The Pfizer press release says "The case split between vaccinated individuals and those who received the placebo indicates a vaccine efficacy rate above 90%".

The Moderna press release says there were "95 cases, of which 90 cases of COVID-19 were observed in the placebo group versus 5 cases observed in the mRNA-1273 group, resulting in a point estimate of vaccine efficacy of 94.5%"

Those numbers may not be directly comparable, because Pfizer may have calculated a statistical confidence interval, rather just a "point estimate". If so, the observed efficacies would probably be indistinguishable.

Why we need to wait for the peer reviewed academic papers based on the full studies.

I'm not sure approval will be waiting on peer reviewed papers. They will submit their evidence to the regulatory authorities for a decision (in UK MHRA). The evidence will be looked at by experts there. Of course I am sure papers will be published, but not as part of getting it into use.

Given what you can get through peer review for publication.... I think the regulators have my confidence, not the publications.

Quite. I know a few people who either are or have been at MHRA, and they are not the type to have the wool pulled over their eyes. One in particular (not on a vaccine area) is still our go to guy for manuscript checking. Its his superpower to spot mistakes (from typos, to stuff that doesn;t make sense, to dodgy bits of data we were hoping to sneak through...)

As opposed to publication where throughput seems to be the demand these days.

Given the lack of comeback for failures in peer reviewing papers - Wakefield anyone? - versus what would happen if the regulator stuffs up...

It's all about incentives - publish shite, nothing seems to happen. The regulators are looking at career ending events, if they screw up.

Too many departments producing papers, too many Journals.

The problem is that there are penalties for not publishing (need papers to fill the journal).

There are no penalties for publishing garbage. Apart from reputation. A bit....

Carnyx

geoffw said:

  

Carnyx said:

Morris_Dancer said:

As an aside, when I had to source references when writing up stuff at university, my favourite ever was a genuine source I found proving that black is darker than white. Thanks, scientists!

Well, either that or a lorry driving study that didn't actually study lorry drivers but asked participants to imagine they were lorry drivers.

How that got through I'll never know.

On the other hand, black bodies emit more light than white, IIRC ...

I don't think so.

Infrared no? (Dim memory of physics lessons ...).

NerysHughes

FrancisUrquhart said:

London and the SE really not seeing much during this second wave. Where as Lombardy in Italy, being smashed again.

https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1328340903120007169?s=20

If you ever saw any TV coverage in the summer from Lombardy literally everyone was wearing masks at all times. In fact it has been law there since April 2020

FeersumEnjineeya

Carnyx said:

Morris_Dancer said:

As an aside, when I had to source references when writing up stuff at university, my favourite ever was a genuine source I found proving that black is darker than white. Thanks, scientists!

Well, either that or a lorry driving study that didn't actually study lorry drivers but asked participants to imagine they were lorry drivers.

How that got through I'll never know.

On the other hand, black bodies emit more light than white, IIRC ...

Indeed they do, though of course they reflect less (because they absorb more).

Morris_Dancer

Mr. kinabalu, aye, and during the race sat next to Ecclestone.

I'm fine with sport generally being apolitical. But if it wants to start delving into political matters (leaving aside that BLM is neo-Marxist bullshit) it can't only say "Racism in America, so bad" and turn a blind eye to literal concentration camps.

At least, it can't if it wants a shred of moral integrity.