In Pox news a friend of mine's OH is ill in bed with Covid. "He's shaking uncontrollably, dripping with sweat, aching from head to toe, a bad cough, no sense of smell or taste, a pounding headache"
He received the first dose of the vaccine as he is a social worker operating in the care sector. Vaccinated Wednesday, symptomatic Sunday, tested positive late Sunday. Others in his office also in the same boat.
One of those grotty edge cases where the vaccine was done just after he caught Covid itself.
Awful news but you need to be careful that stories like that aren't read the wrong way and people avoid being vaccinated because of it.
Oh absolutely. Its not an anti-vax warning, its an anti-cocking about warning.
The problem with all these stories is that because we understand how these things work we read the story one way.
It's however very likely that a lot of people will not understand the issues and will read it a very different way and then use social media to amplifier this story for their own ends.
See 5g and the idea that the vaccine has a chip in it as other examples.
tbf no one understands the issues of single jab efficacy.
Was that anything to do with what I was saying?
Or are you trying to imply that having the jab when infected makes things worse?
You said "because we understand how these things work".
I was pointing out that you do not understand how these things work.
Err, yes we do.
We understand there is essentially no efficacy the week you get the first jab. Jabbed on wednesday, symptomatic on sunday, simply isn't a big enough time window to have ever had the second jab - or for the first jab to start working yet. We do understand that.
Indeed symptomatic on Sunday quite possibly means was infected around Tuesday. Unfortunate timing.
Hope your friends OH gets better ASAP and your friend stays well too RP.
There has been no trial to confirm your assertions.
Yes there has been. The official trial confirmed it.
Jabbed on Wednesday, count that as day 0, symptomatic on Sunday, count that as day 4. In every single trial the data exists to show what happens 4 days after initial jab.
The trial data showed essentially zero efficiacy on day 4. It is to be expected. Not a single person in the trial got a second jab by day 4.
If you were saying nothing has confirmed the impact if you don't get a second jab on day 21 and then there's an infection on day 25 then that would be true. But whether he would or would not receive a second jab on day 21 is immaterial to an infection on day 4 - it was within the original trial parameters.
They were not testing for that and it was not part of the trial design so no.
They were testing for efficacy, and what level of efficacy was achieved, when. Hence graphs like this, in the papers published -
Precisely. Day 4 is before efficacy behins that is in their data.
Had it been day 25 and second dose had been skipped then Topping would have had a point.
It's also silly because there was never under any circumstances going to be a second dose by day 4 so it's meaningless fluff.
I also don't even get where the single jab comment came from.
We are discussing the very first part of this graph during which period (the 1st 10/14 days) there is zero difference between those who received the vaccine and those that received the placebo.
The second jab wouldn't be done before 21 days in the first place and that's been delayed for the reasons I set out last week and yesterday.
Better a 60% chance of protection for 20 people than a 90% chance of protection for 10 people.
And at the moment maximising the number of people protected is the most important issue.
So it would be very useful if Topping actual explained his point rather than sniping from the sidelines.
Has a trial been conducted, by design, to understand efficacy after one dose?
And sidelines? Who are you, Chris Whitty?
Amd what has that to do with the original topic we were talking about? - which was
People catching covid on the day / day before their first vaccination and coming down ill with it a few days later.
None of that has anything to do with the time frame between first and second injections and everything to do with being unlucky enough to catching Covid on approximately the same day their had their first injection.
Gah! This discussion arose because, apropos of @RochdalePioneers telling us about the incidence of infection post first jab, you said:
"The problem with all these stories is that because we understand how these things work we read the story one way."
Which I took to mean: well we know that there can be pre-existing rates of infection when the first jab is administered but the first jab does actually give high rates of immunity.
My point was and is we don't understand how these things work because as far as I'm aware, no trial has been designed and conducted specifically to determine first jab efficacy. Of course there have been data which suggests an answer but no trial AFAIA has been conducted to determine by trial.
Except your "AFAIA" is wrong.
No trial has been designed to test single dose efficiency on an ongoing basis - but a trial was designed to test single dose efficacy from day 0 to day 21.
This was symptomatic on day 4, symptomatic obviously comes days after infection. That is entirely within the definition of what was tested for and determined. Efficacy was demonstrated between days 10 and 21 (but after 21 is unknown) - but no efficacy for day 4. This is entirely and explicitly within the realms of what was tested for.
oh thank you.
Could you provide the link pls.
The graph I posted above in this thread is directly from publication of the results of the Pfzier trial.
"Between the first dose and the second dose, 39 cases in the BNT162b2 group and 82 cases in the placebo group were observed, resulting in a vaccine efficacy of 52% (95% CI, 29.5 to 68.4) during this interval and indicating early protection by the vaccine, starting as soon as 12 days after the first dose."
They also stated: "The study was not designed to assess the efficacy of a single-dose regimen. Nevertheless, in the interval between the first and second doses, the observed vaccine efficacy against Covid-19 was 52%..."
Can you tell me the confidence interval for the '52% effectiveness' ? Or, rather more importantly, what the observed effectiveness was in those aged over 70 ?
Surely we can't say because the sample size will be in single figures for specific cohorts. Again, that's why the UK policy is undoubtedly a gamble but as we've both pointed out it's a gamble that has big pay off and a pretty small downside risk of lengthening lockdown measures for an extra nine weeks for people who have one jab instead of two.
"Better a 60% chance of protection for 20 people than a 90% chance of protection for 10 people."
No. No. No.
Do it properly. If everyone stays in lockdown and wears masks they won't catch the virus. Meantime we roll this out according to clinical trial testing.
There's an added danger, say some expert immunologists, of the UK creating with its delayed 2nd jab just the perfect spawning ground for vaccine resistant covid mutations.
Which would be the second time Tony Blair has unleashed mass death on the world.
Kind of missing the point that most people don't appear to be staying in lockdown. Nor do we have the people to enforce it even if we wanted to.
Finally a cabinet minister who gets it. Probably our biggest single mistake with a casualty list running to tens of thousands. Tragic but totally and utterly foreseeable and indeed foreseen on this site by many contributors.
March would have been too late. February half term was when most of the seeds were sown.
No, if we had shut the doors in March we would almost certainly not have had a second wave, certainly not one of such virulence and lethality. Who knows, we might not even have got this current oh so infectious variant. Idiots going skiing in February, especially to Italy, caused many of the first problems but I think that with the doors shut and lockdown vigorously applied we could have got on top of that, indeed even with new infections arriving at random from abroad we pretty much did.
I agree with Gaussian on this one. However the second wave does seem to have been caused by an imported strain from Europe despite our policy of only letting people go to countries with low prevalence. Of course it is possible that without that, local strains will have proliferated instead. However it does seem that people must behave in risky ways when on holiday. I think I am fairly sensible while on holiday, but compared with normal behaviour where I might go to a pub or restaurant a couple of times a week and use a bus or train similarly frequently, on holiday I typically visit 3-4 bars and restaurants a day, may use public transport daily, and that's without taking into account mixing in the hotel and visiting indoor museums and other tourist attractions.
Just watched the latest launch of the Falcon 9 with its Starlink payload. Still very impressive despite a picture break-up just as it re-landed on the drone ship. Parts of the UK will soon get its internet connection via Starlink.
Just watched the latest launch of the Falcon 9 with its Starlink payload. Still very impressive despite a picture break-up just as it re-landed on the drone ship. Parts of the UK will soon get its internet connection via Starlink.
It is a testiment to what an incredible job SpaceX do that these launches and relanding occur on a regular basis now and get virtually no coverage as it is seen as unremarkable.
The same happened with the shuttle. It was only the Challenger disaster that resumed public (or rather media) interest.
Mrs U got to be in the crowd for the last ever launch....no fair.
On a second reading it seems even more unhinged. A useful reminder after the recent GWB discussions that the current set of of pricks being really ghastly is not a case for a retrospective pardon for their predecessors.
I think it is being mis-read.
What he is trying to say is that, no disrespect to Wales, but E&W isn’t going to cut it on the world stage.
Yep, he’s certainly saying that, but relegating Wales to an afterthought presumably won’t do much for Welsh Unionism? Maybe they’re used to it.
In Pox news a friend of mine's OH is ill in bed with Covid. "He's shaking uncontrollably, dripping with sweat, aching from head to toe, a bad cough, no sense of smell or taste, a pounding headache"
He received the first dose of the vaccine as he is a social worker operating in the care sector. Vaccinated Wednesday, symptomatic Sunday, tested positive late Sunday. Others in his office also in the same boat.
One of those grotty edge cases where the vaccine was done just after he caught Covid itself.
Awful news but you need to be careful that stories like that aren't read the wrong way and people avoid being vaccinated because of it.
Oh absolutely. Its not an anti-vax warning, its an anti-cocking about warning.
The problem with all these stories is that because we understand how these things work we read the story one way.
It's however very likely that a lot of people will not understand the issues and will read it a very different way and then use social media to amplifier this story for their own ends.
See 5g and the idea that the vaccine has a chip in it as other examples.
tbf no one understands the issues of single jab efficacy.
Was that anything to do with what I was saying?
Or are you trying to imply that having the jab when infected makes things worse?
You said "because we understand how these things work".
I was pointing out that you do not understand how these things work.
Err, yes we do.
We understand there is essentially no efficacy the week you get the first jab. Jabbed on wednesday, symptomatic on sunday, simply isn't a big enough time window to have ever had the second jab - or for the first jab to start working yet. We do understand that.
Indeed symptomatic on Sunday quite possibly means was infected around Tuesday. Unfortunate timing.
Hope your friends OH gets better ASAP and your friend stays well too RP.
There has been no trial to confirm your assertions.
Yes there has been. The official trial confirmed it.
Jabbed on Wednesday, count that as day 0, symptomatic on Sunday, count that as day 4. In every single trial the data exists to show what happens 4 days after initial jab.
The trial data showed essentially zero efficiacy on day 4. It is to be expected. Not a single person in the trial got a second jab by day 4.
If you were saying nothing has confirmed the impact if you don't get a second jab on day 21 and then there's an infection on day 25 then that would be true. But whether he would or would not receive a second jab on day 21 is immaterial to an infection on day 4 - it was within the original trial parameters.
They were not testing for that and it was not part of the trial design so no.
They were testing for efficacy, and what level of efficacy was achieved, when. Hence graphs like this, in the papers published -
Precisely. Day 4 is before efficacy behins that is in their data.
Had it been day 25 and second dose had been skipped then Topping would have had a point.
It's also silly because there was never under any circumstances going to be a second dose by day 4 so it's meaningless fluff.
I also don't even get where the single jab comment came from.
We are discussing the very first part of this graph during which period (the 1st 10/14 days) there is zero difference between those who received the vaccine and those that received the placebo.
The second jab wouldn't be done before 21 days in the first place and that's been delayed for the reasons I set out last week and yesterday.
Better a 60% chance of protection for 20 people than a 90% chance of protection for 10 people.
And at the moment maximising the number of people protected is the most important issue.
So it would be very useful if Topping actual explained his point rather than sniping from the sidelines.
Has a trial been conducted, by design, to understand efficacy after one dose?
And sidelines? Who are you, Chris Whitty?
Amd what has that to do with the original topic we were talking about? - which was
People catching covid on the day / day before their first vaccination and coming down ill with it a few days later.
None of that has anything to do with the time frame between first and second injections and everything to do with being unlucky enough to catching Covid on approximately the same day their had their first injection.
Gah! This discussion arose because, apropos of @RochdalePioneers telling us about the incidence of infection post first jab, you said:
"The problem with all these stories is that because we understand how these things work we read the story one way."
Which I took to mean: well we know that there can be pre-existing rates of infection when the first jab is administered but the first jab does actually give high rates of immunity.
My point was and is we don't understand how these things work because as far as I'm aware, no trial has been designed and conducted specifically to determine first jab efficacy. Of course there have been data which suggests an answer but no trial AFAIA has been conducted to determine by trial.
But there are charts that show efficacy and those charts (for at least the first 21 days and given the time required for a vaccine to work the next 5 days to day 26/28 days) relate to the first injection only.
Your entire argument relates to day 21/28 onwards after vaccination when we were talking about people catching Covid on Day -3 through to 0.
It really didn't help at all
Not at all. As I said, this relates to the situation of having had Covid pre-first jab.
We have plenty of data about first dose efficacy. But that was picked up "along the way". There was no trial specifically designed to understand this.
Does it matter? Who knows. Probably not. The premise of vaccinating more people rather than spend vaccine on the already vaccinated is very sound and understandable. Especially with more transmissable variants.
These guys don't know. And they aren't sniping from the sidelines, they are central to the effort.
Further, David Spiegelhalter thinks there should be an embedded randomised control trial to determine the difference between three weeks and 12 weeks. There is currently none planned (as of 10 days ago).
They also talk about viral escape, for which @FrancisUrquhart should probably tune out.
Bizarre that they didn't think it worthwhile to conduct a randomised trial as part of the process. They should have decided that as soon as they decided to go with the delayed booster.
There is the ZOE data. They already have 100,000 people who have had at least one jab. At the moment they are talking about side effects (mainly sore arms and headaches) in due course they will tell us if anyone has caught symptomatic COVID after being jabbed
An old lady I know here said she had flu-like symptoms for a day after. My mother said she had a headache the morning after. Both Pfizer first doses. Doesn’t sound too bad.
But one jab doesn’t create immunity in that person. So where does the herd immunity come from?
After vaccination Everybody can still carry COVID about and give it to everyone, after vaccination old, frail or vulnerable are still going to get very ill and die. They still can’t hug their family. Care homes will still be in difficult place.
That’s not herd immunity back to normal is it?
Instead of word immunity use protection, instead of back to normal say better place?
Looks pretty effective even before the second jab. Unless you are arguing semantics, in which case no number of jabs will offer you immunity.
And I thought it had been demonstrated that these vaccines reduced severe cases practically to zero. So I think your statement there about many still dying is wrong.
This poster isn't worth bothering with, it's just a stream of hysteria and negatives, regardless of the science. He was insinuating that the vaccine could kill you last night. Ignore.
Would you like to go on record as saying COVID vaccinations will return us to normal, or near normal? 🙂
I am Sean.
This country will have all-but-eradicated the virus by this autumn. Our vaccination rollout is astounding.
What does mystic rose think? I’m taking some flack on here last 24 hours for suggesting
1). The science isn’t promising we will be back to normal or near normal 2). Why can’t we use word protection instead of immunity ie you are are 83.4% protected. Herd protection.
I think they want me banned for this message. Anabob said this is hyperbole and everything I post is negative. Eek said I am absolutely dangerous. 🙁
I think we will be back to near normal late summer and certainly into the autumn.
This is on the basis of latest UK policy and our vaccination rollout. It's also conditional on there not being vaccine resistant mutations.
The UK Government have played an absolute blinder on vaccines. The decision to bulk order in advance from multiple developers is probably the greatest decision ever taken in the history of the United Kingdom. Is that hyperbole? I don't think so.
Do you think near normal produced from vaccination will last right through next winter? And does your near normal have MR and Mrs Big G hugging grandkids, and everyone doing care home visits?
Do you think seasons have played a part around the world. Seasonal sunlight and temperatures? So it looked like good measures having impact/mistakes made, but it was seasons behind it?
Boris just made an obvious observation that of course fish sales across Europe have been hard hit as restaurants and pubs across Europe are currently closed
I had not thought that one, but it is a fair comment
But people are still eating so the fact that restaurants and pubs are closed should have no impact on demand
And the two largest markets, France & Spain, have cultures that actually buy and cook fish and seafood at home.
Is this home cooking of fresh (which seems to be the issue) or frozen fish?
You can't keep fresh very long and shopping daily doesn't seem like a good idea. Although we've got a big local fish market I can't see it being particularly popular at the moment.
Waitrose sell fish from the wet fish counter with a couple of days use by date, I think modern supply chains get it to the shop quicker. I simply plan my menu to have fresh fish on the day I shop or at least within 48 hours.
All supermarkets do that but people will be spacing out their shop visits more, surely? We've not bought any fresh fish for home supermarket delivery - frozen makes more sense.
I don't know whether markets are all open as normal in Spain? They have quite a severe lockdown with curfews et al.
It may be convenient for the government to blame everything on Covid but it can't be having zero effect.
The market I mentioned in Alicante closes at 2.30 today, the normal time I think. Afaict a lot of ‘ordinary’ people do their food shopping there so closing them down would be akin to us closing down supermarkets.
On a second reading it seems even more unhinged. A useful reminder after the recent GWB discussions that the current set of of pricks being really ghastly is not a case for a retrospective pardon for their predecessors.
I kept scrolling down because I thought surely there is a paragraph missing, where it says of course the argument in the previous paragraph (that Johnson should just refuse to engage with the issue) is complete nonsense. But no. He really is saying that Johnson should simply hope the issue goes away. Insane. Also the whole "losing Scotland" thing isn't a good look if you don't want to sound like a colonialist. And surely most people say "Catalan" not "Catalonian". Weird piece of writing from someone who is paid to edit newspapers for a living.
Just watched the latest launch of the Falcon 9 with its Starlink payload. Still very impressive despite a picture break-up just as it re-landed on the drone ship. Parts of the UK will soon get its internet connection via Starlink.
It is a testiment to what an incredible job SpaceX do that these launches and relanding occur on a regular basis now and get virtually no coverage as it is seen as unremarkable.
I saw they have just bought two semi-sub rigs from Valaris for conversion to spaceports for launches and landings offshore.
It will be interesting to see what style of conversion they do vs the Sea Launch rebuild of their platform. The cost of which helped to sink SeaLaunch.
Knowing SpaceX it will be a lot cheaper.
Then again, they are planning on launching the highest liftoff thrust rocket in history from them.
Sealaunch were always going to have trouble given the platform they were using. The Ocean Odyssey had already suffered almost total destruction during the 1988 blowout and had then sat rusting in Dundee for 5 years. Also the Valaris rigs are much bigger and newer and more suited to the sorts of work SpaceX wants to use them for.
Can we run a book on the following - a politician in the UK trying to put a very high end electric vehicle on expenses on the grounds that she/he needs the performance.
Remember the launch of the iPad? Cries of a digital divide and apparently every politician needed one for work.
The biggest reason people are buying electric cars are for the massive company car tax breaks and congestion charge exemption. They are way more expensive to lease than regular cars, if you just want one personally. The MPs need to find a way to get their car registered to a company, so expect lots of small businesses set up by close relatives in the near future.
"Better a 60% chance of protection for 20 people than a 90% chance of protection for 10 people."
No. No. No.
Do it properly. If everyone stays in lockdown and wears masks they won't catch the virus. Meantime we roll this out according to clinical trial testing.
There's an added danger, say some expert immunologists, of the UK creating with its delayed 2nd jab just the perfect spawning ground for vaccine resistant covid mutations.
Which would be the second time Tony Blair has unleashed mass death on the world.
I agree. It is Tony Blair’s fault if this is a botched roll out.
Not just him - the vaccine committee, the chief scientific officers of the nations, the chief medical officers of the nations...
But one jab doesn’t create immunity in that person. So where does the herd immunity come from?
After vaccination Everybody can still carry COVID about and give it to everyone, after vaccination old, frail or vulnerable are still going to get very ill and die. They still can’t hug their family. Care homes will still be in difficult place.
That’s not herd immunity back to normal is it?
Instead of word immunity use protection, instead of back to normal say better place?
Looks pretty effective even before the second jab. Unless you are arguing semantics, in which case no number of jabs will offer you immunity.
And I thought it had been demonstrated that these vaccines reduced severe cases practically to zero. So I think your statement there about many still dying is wrong.
This poster isn't worth bothering with, it's just a stream of hysteria and negatives, regardless of the science. He was insinuating that the vaccine could kill you last night. Ignore.
Would you like to go on record as saying COVID vaccinations will return us to normal, or near normal? 🙂
I am Sean.
This country will have all-but-eradicated the virus by this autumn. Our vaccination rollout is astounding.
What does mystic rose think? I’m taking some flack on here last 24 hours for suggesting
1). The science isn’t promising we will be back to normal or near normal 2). Why can’t we use word protection instead of immunity ie you are are 83.4% protected. Herd protection.
I think they want me banned for this message. Anabob said this is hyperbole and everything I post is negative. Eek said I am absolutely dangerous. 🙁
Without the hyperbole I believe their argument is that you are making a combined error of cherry picking data, misunderstanding data and drawing conclusions from the data that cannot be supported.
This might be a lame defence... but hypothesising?
On a second reading it seems even more unhinged. A useful reminder after the recent GWB discussions that the current set of of pricks being really ghastly is not a case for a retrospective pardon for their predecessors.
I kept scrolling down because I thought surely there is a paragraph missing, where it says of course the argument in the previous paragraph (that Johnson should just refuse to engage with the issue) is complete nonsense. But no. He really is saying that Johnson should simply hope the issue goes away. Insane. Also the whole "losing Scotland" thing isn't a good look if you don't want to sound like a colonialist. And surely most people say "Catalan" not "Catalonian". Weird piece of writing from someone who is paid to edit newspapers for a living.
SIDS (Scottish Independence Derangement Syndrome) is a thing evidently.
In Pox news a friend of mine's OH is ill in bed with Covid. "He's shaking uncontrollably, dripping with sweat, aching from head to toe, a bad cough, no sense of smell or taste, a pounding headache"
He received the first dose of the vaccine as he is a social worker operating in the care sector. Vaccinated Wednesday, symptomatic Sunday, tested positive late Sunday. Others in his office also in the same boat.
One of those grotty edge cases where the vaccine was done just after he caught Covid itself.
Awful news but you need to be careful that stories like that aren't read the wrong way and people avoid being vaccinated because of it.
Oh absolutely. Its not an anti-vax warning, its an anti-cocking about warning.
The problem with all these stories is that because we understand how these things work we read the story one way.
It's however very likely that a lot of people will not understand the issues and will read it a very different way and then use social media to amplifier this story for their own ends.
See 5g and the idea that the vaccine has a chip in it as other examples.
tbf no one understands the issues of single jab efficacy.
Was that anything to do with what I was saying?
Or are you trying to imply that having the jab when infected makes things worse?
You said "because we understand how these things work".
I was pointing out that you do not understand how these things work.
Err, yes we do.
We understand there is essentially no efficacy the week you get the first jab. Jabbed on wednesday, symptomatic on sunday, simply isn't a big enough time window to have ever had the second jab - or for the first jab to start working yet. We do understand that.
Indeed symptomatic on Sunday quite possibly means was infected around Tuesday. Unfortunate timing.
Hope your friends OH gets better ASAP and your friend stays well too RP.
There has been no trial to confirm your assertions.
Yes there has been. The official trial confirmed it.
Jabbed on Wednesday, count that as day 0, symptomatic on Sunday, count that as day 4. In every single trial the data exists to show what happens 4 days after initial jab.
The trial data showed essentially zero efficiacy on day 4. It is to be expected. Not a single person in the trial got a second jab by day 4.
If you were saying nothing has confirmed the impact if you don't get a second jab on day 21 and then there's an infection on day 25 then that would be true. But whether he would or would not receive a second jab on day 21 is immaterial to an infection on day 4 - it was within the original trial parameters.
They were not testing for that and it was not part of the trial design so no.
They were testing for efficacy, and what level of efficacy was achieved, when. Hence graphs like this, in the papers published -
Precisely. Day 4 is before efficacy behins that is in their data.
Had it been day 25 and second dose had been skipped then Topping would have had a point.
It's also silly because there was never under any circumstances going to be a second dose by day 4 so it's meaningless fluff.
I also don't even get where the single jab comment came from.
We are discussing the very first part of this graph during which period (the 1st 10/14 days) there is zero difference between those who received the vaccine and those that received the placebo.
The second jab wouldn't be done before 21 days in the first place and that's been delayed for the reasons I set out last week and yesterday.
Better a 60% chance of protection for 20 people than a 90% chance of protection for 10 people.
And at the moment maximising the number of people protected is the most important issue.
So it would be very useful if Topping actual explained his point rather than sniping from the sidelines.
Has a trial been conducted, by design, to understand efficacy after one dose?
And sidelines? Who are you, Chris Whitty?
Amd what has that to do with the original topic we were talking about? - which was
People catching covid on the day / day before their first vaccination and coming down ill with it a few days later.
None of that has anything to do with the time frame between first and second injections and everything to do with being unlucky enough to catching Covid on approximately the same day their had their first injection.
Gah! This discussion arose because, apropos of @RochdalePioneers telling us about the incidence of infection post first jab, you said:
"The problem with all these stories is that because we understand how these things work we read the story one way."
Which I took to mean: well we know that there can be pre-existing rates of infection when the first jab is administered but the first jab does actually give high rates of immunity.
My point was and is we don't understand how these things work because as far as I'm aware, no trial has been designed and conducted specifically to determine first jab efficacy. Of course there have been data which suggests an answer but no trial AFAIA has been conducted to determine by trial.
But there are charts that show efficacy and those charts (for at least the first 21 days and given the time required for a vaccine to work the next 5 days to day 26/28 days) relate to the first injection only.
Your entire argument relates to day 21/28 onwards after vaccination when we were talking about people catching Covid on Day -3 through to 0.
It really didn't help at all
Not at all. As I said, this relates to the situation of having had Covid pre-first jab.
We have plenty of data about first dose efficacy. But that was picked up "along the way". There was no trial specifically designed to understand this.
Does it matter? Who knows. Probably not. The premise of vaccinating more people rather than spend vaccine on the already vaccinated is very sound and understandable. Especially with more transmissable variants.
These guys don't know. And they aren't sniping from the sidelines, they are central to the effort.
Further, David Spiegelhalter thinks there should be an embedded randomised control trial to determine the difference between three weeks and 12 weeks. There is currently none planned (as of 10 days ago).
They also talk about viral escape, for which @FrancisUrquhart should probably tune out.
Bizarre that they didn't think it worthwhile to conduct a randomised trial as part of the process. They should have decided that as soon as they decided to go with the delayed booster.
There is the ZOE data. They already have 100,000 people who have had at least one jab. At the moment they are talking about side effects (mainly sore arms and headaches) in due course they will tell us if anyone has caught symptomatic COVID after being jabbed
An old lady I know here said she had flu-like symptoms for a day after. My mother said she had a headache the morning after. Both Pfizer first doses. Doesn’t sound too bad.
Although for a lot of people the jab will be worse than the infection they might have had, although without the risk of something really nasty of course
Boris just made an obvious observation that of course fish sales across Europe have been hard hit as restaurants and pubs across Europe are currently closed
I had not thought that one, but it is a fair comment
But people are still eating so the fact that restaurants and pubs are closed should have no impact on demand
Except, that in many countries people are restricted how often they can go out and even if they aren't, most people are trying to limit their trips to supermarket and other food shops. Fresh fish isn't something that keeps for weeks, so demand will be up for items with long shelf lives e.g. we all saw the panic biying of dried pasta
Secondly there are food stuff thats people don't cook as much at home, preferring to eat them in restaurants, especially ones that require quite a lot of prep, fish being a good example e.g. not many people would ever attempt to cook a fresh lobster at home.
Yes, I could readily believe that salmon sales are up while cod/haddock sales are down, and shellfish down more. Much like commercial butchers say beef mince and chicken breast sales are up but prime steak sales are much worse.
Which means you can get some cracking deals at one near me. 1lb t-bone steaks for £7.50 each, vac packed and great quality.
Oh i haven't had a good steak in 10 months now....sad......
Kremlin foe Alexei Navalny has accused Vladimir Putin of using state cash to fund his secret mistresses.
Navalny, 44, claimed that the Russian leader - who he labels the world's richest man - uses a 'slush fund' to cover the expenses of his other women and their families including his 17-year-old love child.
He has also claimed that Putin has a £1billion palace on the Black Sea with a red velvet pole-dancing boudoir and a casino.
Boris just made an obvious observation that of course fish sales across Europe have been hard hit as restaurants and pubs across Europe are currently closed
I had not thought that one, but it is a fair comment
But people are still eating so the fact that restaurants and pubs are closed should have no impact on demand
I think with regards shellfish (which is what the Scottish protests were about) a far higher proportion of catch is sold to the restaurant trade compared to other fish, so the point has some validity.
Not nec true fort exports. Which were still very significant as was clear.
More generally our local fish van has been noticeably busier thanks to lockdown.
Can we run a book on the following - a politician in the UK trying to put a very high end electric vehicle on expenses on the grounds that she/he needs the performance.
Remember the launch of the iPad? Cries of a digital divide and apparently every politician needed one for work.
The biggest reason people are buying electric cars are for the massive company car tax breaks and congestion charge exemption. They are way more expensive to lease than regular cars, if you just want one personally. The MPs need to find a way to get their car registered to a company, so expect lots of small businesses set up by close relatives in the near future.
one thing I've seen a few times on linked in is Jaguar / Range Rovers rather expensive subscription service.
As you can use salary sacrifice for it you can end up with a new I-pace every 6 months for something like £500 a month.
Finally a cabinet minister who gets it. Probably our biggest single mistake with a casualty list running to tens of thousands. Tragic but totally and utterly foreseeable and indeed foreseen on this site by many contributors.
March would have been too late. February half term was when most of the seeds were sown.
No, if we had shut the doors in March we would almost certainly not have had a second wave, certainly not one of such virulence and lethality. Who knows, we might not even have got this current oh so infectious variant. Idiots going skiing in February, especially to Italy, caused many of the first problems but I think that with the doors shut and lockdown vigorously applied we could have got on top of that, indeed even with new infections arriving at random from abroad we pretty much did.
I agree with Gaussian on this one. However the second wave does seem to have been caused by an imported strain from Europe despite our policy of only letting people go to countries with low prevalence. Of course it is possible that without that, local strains will have proliferated instead. However it does seem that people must behave in risky ways when on holiday. I think I am fairly sensible while on holiday, but compared with normal behaviour where I might go to a pub or restaurant a couple of times a week and use a bus or train similarly frequently, on holiday I typically visit 3-4 bars and restaurants a day, may use public transport daily, and that's without taking into account mixing in the hotel and visiting indoor museums and other tourist attractions.
Its the random element of it. Those stupid enough to go on holiday during a pandemic are found and returned all over the country creating endless new threads of infection. Much more difficult to control than a local break. Just crazy and irresponsible.
We shall never hear such a speech again. Hopefully.
The big question over the next year or two is whether the US can, by combination of revelation from the investigation of the Capitol riot, and the new administration’s bipartisan approach, consign the Trump era to the naughty step of history.
Kremlin foe Alexei Navalny has accused Vladimir Putin of using state cash to fund his secret mistresses.
Navalny, 44, claimed that the Russian leader - who he labels the world's richest man - uses a 'slush fund' to cover the expenses of his other women and their families including his 17-year-old love child.
He has also claimed that Putin has a £1billion palace on the Black Sea with a red velvet pole-dancing boudoir and a casino.
We shall never hear such a speech again. Hopefully.
The big question over the next year or two is whether the US can, by combination of revelation from the investigation of the Capitol riot, and the new administration’s bipartisan approach, consign the Trump era to the naughty step of history.
Biden needs to ponder carefully on the reasons why Trump was elected in the first place.
If he learns from some of the underlying motives then the US has a bright future. If he reverts to the deplorables then it's xxxxed and I might even back Trump for 2024.
We shall never hear such a speech again. Hopefully.
The big question over the next year or two is whether the US can, by combination of revelation from the investigation of the Capitol riot, and the new administration’s bipartisan approach, consign the Trump era to the naughty step of history.
"Better a 60% chance of protection for 20 people than a 90% chance of protection for 10 people."
No. No. No.
Do it properly. If everyone stays in lockdown and wears masks they won't catch the virus. Meantime we roll this out according to clinical trial testing.
There's an added danger, say some expert immunologists, of the UK creating with its delayed 2nd jab just the perfect spawning ground for vaccine resistant covid mutations.
Which would be the second time Tony Blair has unleashed mass death on the world.
Kind of missing the point that most people don't appear to be staying in lockdown. Nor do we have the people to enforce it even if we wanted to.
I totally disagree with this. Yes it is not like March-May last year, but many many more businesses are open with covid precautions. People are back on the outside exercise regime too. I was asked the way yesterday by a couple in the woods near me - very unusual. Massive uptick in the number of people walking. The pubs are shut, the footy is shut, the cinema is shut. This is a lockdown, it is working (cases falling). If you look back at May we can't easily compare the case number falls, but the key thing is the deaths. This is the same measurement and it unfortunately saying that the deaths will be high for a couple of months.
But one jab doesn’t create immunity in that person. So where does the herd immunity come from?
After vaccination Everybody can still carry COVID about and give it to everyone, after vaccination old, frail or vulnerable are still going to get very ill and die. They still can’t hug their family. Care homes will still be in difficult place.
That’s not herd immunity back to normal is it?
Instead of word immunity use protection, instead of back to normal say better place?
Looks pretty effective even before the second jab. Unless you are arguing semantics, in which case no number of jabs will offer you immunity.
And I thought it had been demonstrated that these vaccines reduced severe cases practically to zero. So I think your statement there about many still dying is wrong.
This poster isn't worth bothering with, it's just a stream of hysteria and negatives, regardless of the science. He was insinuating that the vaccine could kill you last night. Ignore.
Would you like to go on record as saying COVID vaccinations will return us to normal, or near normal? 🙂
I am Sean.
This country will have all-but-eradicated the virus by this autumn. Our vaccination rollout is astounding.
What does mystic rose think? I’m taking some flack on here last 24 hours for suggesting
1). The science isn’t promising we will be back to normal or near normal 2). Why can’t we use word protection instead of immunity ie you are are 83.4% protected. Herd protection.
I think they want me banned for this message. Anabob said this is hyperbole and everything I post is negative. Eek said I am absolutely dangerous. 🙁
Without the hyperbole I believe their argument is that you are making a combined error of cherry picking data, misunderstanding data and drawing conclusions from the data that cannot be supported.
This might be a lame defence... but hypothesising?
You would have to ask them. I am making no judgement as I don't know enough about this to make any claims about it or to judge others. I am just explaining what their criticisms seem to be based on.
On a second reading it seems even more unhinged. A useful reminder after the recent GWB discussions that the current set of of pricks being really ghastly is not a case for a retrospective pardon for their predecessors.
I kept scrolling down because I thought surely there is a paragraph missing, where it says of course the argument in the previous paragraph (that Johnson should just refuse to engage with the issue) is complete nonsense. But no. He really is saying that Johnson should simply hope the issue goes away. Insane. Also the whole "losing Scotland" thing isn't a good look if you don't want to sound like a colonialist. And surely most people say "Catalan" not "Catalonian". Weird piece of writing from someone who is paid to edit newspapers for a living.
SIDS (Scottish Independence Derangement Syndrome) is a thing evidently.
Don't think there is any doubt that Boris will just say no, and the issue will be parked til 2024 at least. The worst that can happen to him is listening to Ian Blackford fulminating at PMQs and he rather enjoys that anyway.
As to 2024? If Starmer wins, and its still bubbling, he'll set up a constitutional commission and, ultimately, offer a three option referendum with the federalism option being the winner. Voters will split the difference.
We shall never hear such a speech again. Hopefully.
The big question over the next year or two is whether the US can, by combination of revelation from the investigation of the Capitol riot, and the new administration’s bipartisan approach, consign the Trump era to the naughty step of history.
Kind of worrying that a third of respondents don't think she should resign if she's committed what amounts to the crime of perjury, although we are talking Wings over Scotland here.
For the record, I will be very, very surprised if she has. While her husband's dealings look distinctly dodgy, Salmond is behaving more and more like his mate Trump right now and we all know how much truth was found there.
Off topic, but this blasted pox is pretty unpleasant. Youngest son describing it as "really shitty" - permanent headache, aching joints, worst sore throat ever, unable to sleep. And that's for a fit 22 year old ......
He's a key worker in food. 9 out of 11 people at his place of work have come down with it. It makes you realise what a risk they are all running.
So anyone who goes into these shops without wearing a mask, distancing and sanitising etc is a total and utter selfish shitbag as far as I'm concerned.
Can we run a book on the following - a politician in the UK trying to put a very high end electric vehicle on expenses on the grounds that she/he needs the performance.
Remember the launch of the iPad? Cries of a digital divide and apparently every politician needed one for work.
The biggest reason people are buying electric cars are for the massive company car tax breaks and congestion charge exemption. They are way more expensive to lease than regular cars, if you just want one personally. The MPs need to find a way to get their car registered to a company, so expect lots of small businesses set up by close relatives in the near future.
one thing I've seen a few times on linked in is Jaguar / Range Rovers rather expensive subscription service.
As you can use salary sacrifice for it you can end up with a new I-pace every 6 months for something like £500 a month.
As it's a JLR product you'll fucking need a new one every six months.
We shall never hear such a speech again. Hopefully.
The big question over the next year or two is whether the US can, by combination of revelation from the investigation of the Capitol riot, and the new administration’s bipartisan approach, consign the Trump era to the naughty step of history.
Biden needs to ponder carefully on the reasons why Trump was elected in the first place.
Hillary received the votes of more Americans than Trump did.
We shall never hear such a speech again. Hopefully.
The big question over the next year or two is whether the US can, by combination of revelation from the investigation of the Capitol riot, and the new administration’s bipartisan approach, consign the Trump era to the naughty step of history.
Sorry what's 'bipartisan' about Biden's approach?
Well he doesn't re-tweet "The only good Republican is a dead Republican", for a start.
Off topic, but this blasted pox is pretty unpleasant. Youngest son describing it as "really shitty" - permanent headache, aching joints, worst sore throat ever, unable to sleep. And that's for a fit 22 year old ......
He's a key worker in food. 9 out of 11 people at his place of work have come down with it. It makes you realise what a risk they are all running.
So anyone who goes into these shops without wearing a mask, distancing and sanitising etc is a total and utter selfish shitbag as far as I'm concerned.
If you have Covid you shouldn`t be going into shops whether or not you are wearing a mask. I fear that some people with mild symptoms who "feel well enough to go out" do so thinking it is legitimate as long as they wear a mask.
Kind of worrying that a third of respondents don't think she should resign if she's committed what amounts to the crime of perjury, although we are talking Wings over Scotland here.
For the record, I will be very, very surprised if she has. While her husband's dealings look distinctly dodgy, Salmond is behaving more and more like his mate Trump right now and we all know how much truth was found there.
That's unfair. You need to realise that Mr Trump was ihnerited by AS from the Labour-LD admin and FM in Holyrood and their juniors in Abdnshire on the pretext of jobs - and although Mr Salmond tried to get off well with him, the relationship soon went very sour very quickly when Mr T realsied he couldn't bully Mr S like he did the previous lot. The transcripts of conversations between the two were most revealing of Mr T's mentality, and gave the more alert Scots an early insight into the Trump presidency which was more than fulfilled.
Finally a cabinet minister who gets it. Probably our biggest single mistake with a casualty list running to tens of thousands. Tragic but totally and utterly foreseeable and indeed foreseen on this site by many contributors.
March would have been too late. February half term was when most of the seeds were sown.
No, if we had shut the doors in March we would almost certainly not have had a second wave, certainly not one of such virulence and lethality. Who knows, we might not even have got this current oh so infectious variant. Idiots going skiing in February, especially to Italy, caused many of the first problems but I think that with the doors shut and lockdown vigorously applied we could have got on top of that, indeed even with new infections arriving at random from abroad we pretty much did.
I agree with you.
But, remember, we had our very own pb.com idiot who went off skiing at the height of the pandemic in 2020.
How may people at the time called the skiers out for grossly irresponsible behaviour? It is only clear in retrospect.
At the time (March/April 2020) , my recollection is that there was scientific modelling that claimed the effect of shutting the airports would be small.
The main mistake we have repeatedly made is to treat the scientific modelling of what was then an unknown disease of unknown characteristics as though it had real predictive power.
A shoutout for Wilmington Animal Hospital, in Biden’s home town. Great service to me and my dog in October 2019.
That’s the thing with America.
Take your dog to a European vet on the way home, they charge you €20 for the worming tablet and fill in your pet passport and send you on your way.
Take your dog to an American vet, and they insist you need a full health check before they could even consider signing any paperwork, give him a quick once over, charge you $50, insist that you register with their practice, and then once you are back in the UK send you emails every week thereafter telling you how great are their services.
Kind of worrying that a third of respondents don't think she should resign if she's committed what amounts to the crime of perjury, although we are talking Wings over Scotland here.
For the record, I will be very, very surprised if she has. While her husband's dealings look distinctly dodgy, Salmond is behaving more and more like his mate Trump right now and we all know how much truth was found there.
No because your Corbyn love in ended with such disgrace , worst GE since 1935 and SKS was voted in by Labour membership by a huge margin. You say the same thing ever week .
He was correct to go on the home office and the latest Prit patel comments. The loss of data could cause future murders and rapes not to be solved. Can not get more serious than that what ever your prejudices say.
I think a nuclear war would be more serious than that
We shall never hear such a speech again. Hopefully.
The big question over the next year or two is whether the US can, by combination of revelation from the investigation of the Capitol riot, and the new administration’s bipartisan approach, consign the Trump era to the naughty step of history.
Sorry what's 'bipartisan' about Biden's approach?
Well he doesn't re-tweet "The only good Republican is a dead Republican", for a start.
Then again, he didn't dub half his electorate 'deplorables'
Ah healing Hillary, bet we're going to see plenty of her now
Kind of worrying that a third of respondents don't think she should resign if she's committed what amounts to the crime of perjury, although we are talking Wings over Scotland here.
For the record, I will be very, very surprised if she has. While her husband's dealings look distinctly dodgy, Salmond is behaving more and more like his mate Trump right now and we all know how much truth was found there.
That's unfair. You need to realise that Mr Trump was ihnerited by AS from the Labour-LD admin and FM in Holyrood and their juniors in Abdnshire on the pretext of jobs - and although Mr Salmond tried to get off well with him, the relationship soon went very sour very quickly when Mr T realsied he couldn't bully Mr S like he did the previous lot. The transcripts of conversations between the two were most revealing of Mr T's mentality, and gave the more alert Scots an early insight into the Trump presidency which was more than fulfilled.
My recollection is that Trump fell out with Salmond when he discovered that offshore wind turbines were going to spoil the view from his new Aberdeenshire golf course and ScotGov was disinclined to do anything about it. Hitherto they were best buddies which isn't too surprising given their rather similar personality traits.
Off topic, but this blasted pox is pretty unpleasant. Youngest son describing it as "really shitty" - permanent headache, aching joints, worst sore throat ever, unable to sleep. And that's for a fit 22 year old ......
He's a key worker in food. 9 out of 11 people at his place of work have come down with it. It makes you realise what a risk they are all running.
So anyone who goes into these shops without wearing a mask, distancing and sanitising etc is a total and utter selfish shitbag as far as I'm concerned.
If you have Covid you shouldn`t be going into shops whether or not you are wearing a mask. I fear that some people with mild symptoms who "feel well enough to go out" do so thinking it is legitimate as long as they wear a mask.
I know that. He knows that. But people who work in shops don't have the option of avoiding contact and are at risk from the selfish or unthinking behaviour of others.
Kind of worrying that a third of respondents don't think she should resign if she's committed what amounts to the crime of perjury, although we are talking Wings over Scotland here.
For the record, I will be very, very surprised if she has. While her husband's dealings look distinctly dodgy, Salmond is behaving more and more like his mate Trump right now and we all know how much truth was found there.
That's unfair. You need to realise that Mr Trump was ihnerited by AS from the Labour-LD admin and FM in Holyrood and their juniors in Abdnshire on the pretext of jobs - and although Mr Salmond tried to get off well with him, the relationship soon went very sour very quickly when Mr T realsied he couldn't bully Mr S like he did the previous lot. The transcripts of conversations between the two were most revealing of Mr T's mentality, and gave the more alert Scots an early insight into the Trump presidency which was more than fulfilled.
My recollection is that Trump fell out with Salmond when he discovered that offshore wind turbines were going to spoil the view from his new Aberdeenshire golf course and ScotGov was disinclined to do anything about it. Hitherto they were best buddies which isn't too surprising given their rather similar personality traits.
That's correct about the wind turbines - though they were a long way away.
Edit: It was Mr T's behaviour when he realised that Mr S wasn't going to bend over that really was revealing. And at that time he was merely a businessman with bad taste in bathroom fittings.
Kind of worrying that a third of respondents don't think she should resign if she's committed what amounts to the crime of perjury, although we are talking Wings over Scotland here.
For the record, I will be very, very surprised if she has. While her husband's dealings look distinctly dodgy, Salmond is behaving more and more like his mate Trump right now and we all know how much truth was found there.
Careful. WoS uses proper pollsters.
In this case, it uses Panelbase. Given their love of push polling, I'd hesitate to call them 'proper' pollsters.
Edit - although in this case, that's if anything more worrying because the push in that particular poll was clearly to get people to say she should resign - and still a third stuck out and said she shouldn't.
Kind of worrying that a third of respondents don't think she should resign if she's committed what amounts to the crime of perjury, although we are talking Wings over Scotland here.
For the record, I will be very, very surprised if she has. While her husband's dealings look distinctly dodgy, Salmond is behaving more and more like his mate Trump right now and we all know how much truth was found there.
Careful. WoS uses proper pollsters.
In this case, it uses Panelbase. Given their love of push polling, I'd hesitate to call them 'proper' pollsters.
Well, you can see the question asked, which seemed reasonable.
However, this was being asked by some other mob in the same survey -
Kind of worrying that a third of respondents don't think she should resign if she's committed what amounts to the crime of perjury, although we are talking Wings over Scotland here.
For the record, I will be very, very surprised if she has. While her husband's dealings look distinctly dodgy, Salmond is behaving more and more like his mate Trump right now and we all know how much truth was found there.
That's unfair. You need to realise that Mr Trump was ihnerited by AS from the Labour-LD admin and FM in Holyrood and their juniors in Abdnshire on the pretext of jobs - and although Mr Salmond tried to get off well with him, the relationship soon went very sour very quickly when Mr T realsied he couldn't bully Mr S like he did the previous lot. The transcripts of conversations between the two were most revealing of Mr T's mentality, and gave the more alert Scots an early insight into the Trump presidency which was more than fulfilled.
My recollection is that Trump fell out with Salmond when he discovered that offshore wind turbines were going to spoil the view from his new Aberdeenshire golf course and ScotGov was disinclined to do anything about it. Hitherto they were best buddies which isn't too surprising given their rather similar personality traits.
That's correct about the wind turbines - though they were a long way away.
Edit: It was Mr T's behaviour when he realised that Mr S wasn't going to bend over that really was revealing. And at that time he was merely a businessman with bad taste in bathroom fittings.
Yep. The Capo discovered his influence had limits. The affront probably helped to propel him into the White House. If only Eck had said yes...
I read an article by a US lawyer saying that the senate cannot try a past president only one in office. Just wondered if any lawyers on here have a view.
We shall never hear such a speech again. Hopefully.
The big question over the next year or two is whether the US can, by combination of revelation from the investigation of the Capitol riot, and the new administration’s bipartisan approach, consign the Trump era to the naughty step of history.
Sorry what's 'bipartisan' about Biden's approach?
Well he doesn't re-tweet "The only good Republican is a dead Republican", for a start.
Then again, he didn't dub half his electorate 'deplorables'
Ah healing Hillary, bet we're going to see plenty of her now
Well, Biden did go down that road either.
Perhaps not calling for the death of your opponents is a small step, but it seems like a start.
Kind of worrying that a third of respondents don't think she should resign if she's committed what amounts to the crime of perjury, although we are talking Wings over Scotland here.
For the record, I will be very, very surprised if she has. While her husband's dealings look distinctly dodgy, Salmond is behaving more and more like his mate Trump right now and we all know how much truth was found there.
That's unfair. You need to realise that Mr Trump was ihnerited by AS from the Labour-LD admin and FM in Holyrood and their juniors in Abdnshire on the pretext of jobs - and although Mr Salmond tried to get off well with him, the relationship soon went very sour very quickly when Mr T realsied he couldn't bully Mr S like he did the previous lot. The transcripts of conversations between the two were most revealing of Mr T's mentality, and gave the more alert Scots an early insight into the Trump presidency which was more than fulfilled.
My recollection is that Trump fell out with Salmond when he discovered that offshore wind turbines were going to spoil the view from his new Aberdeenshire golf course and ScotGov was disinclined to do anything about it. Hitherto they were best buddies which isn't too surprising given their rather similar personality traits.
That's correct about the wind turbines - though they were a long way away.
Edit: It was Mr T's behaviour when he realised that Mr S wasn't going to bend over that really was revealing. And at that time he was merely a businessman with bad taste in bathroom fittings.
It should be a truth universally acknowledged that Tories who bring up Salmond’s relationship with Trump are invariably Tories who thought Theresa’s holding of the tiny hand was a master stroke for the special relationship. Anyway, let’s think of happier times.
Kind of worrying that a third of respondents don't think she should resign if she's committed what amounts to the crime of perjury, although we are talking Wings over Scotland here.
For the record, I will be very, very surprised if she has. While her husband's dealings look distinctly dodgy, Salmond is behaving more and more like his mate Trump right now and we all know how much truth was found there.
That's unfair. You need to realise that Mr Trump was ihnerited by AS from the Labour-LD admin and FM in Holyrood and their juniors in Abdnshire on the pretext of jobs - and although Mr Salmond tried to get off well with him, the relationship soon went very sour very quickly when Mr T realsied he couldn't bully Mr S like he did the previous lot. The transcripts of conversations between the two were most revealing of Mr T's mentality, and gave the more alert Scots an early insight into the Trump presidency which was more than fulfilled.
My recollection is that Trump fell out with Salmond when he discovered that offshore wind turbines were going to spoil the view from his new Aberdeenshire golf course and ScotGov was disinclined to do anything about it. Hitherto they were best buddies which isn't too surprising given their rather similar personality traits.
That's correct about the wind turbines - though they were a long way away.
Edit: It was Mr T's behaviour when he realised that Mr S wasn't going to bend over that really was revealing. And at that time he was merely a businessman with bad taste in bathroom fittings.
Yep. The Capo discovered his influence had limits. The affront probably helped to propel him into the White House. If only Eck had said yes...
And yet a second course has been approved. Despite the acknowledgement that the first one caused environmental damage.
In Pox news a friend of mine's OH is ill in bed with Covid. "He's shaking uncontrollably, dripping with sweat, aching from head to toe, a bad cough, no sense of smell or taste, a pounding headache"
He received the first dose of the vaccine as he is a social worker operating in the care sector. Vaccinated Wednesday, symptomatic Sunday, tested positive late Sunday. Others in his office also in the same boat.
One of those grotty edge cases where the vaccine was done just after he caught Covid itself.
Awful news but you need to be careful that stories like that aren't read the wrong way and people avoid being vaccinated because of it.
Oh absolutely. Its not an anti-vax warning, its an anti-cocking about warning.
The problem with all these stories is that because we understand how these things work we read the story one way.
It's however very likely that a lot of people will not understand the issues and will read it a very different way and then use social media to amplifier this story for their own ends.
See 5g and the idea that the vaccine has a chip in it as other examples.
tbf no one understands the issues of single jab efficacy.
Was that anything to do with what I was saying?
Or are you trying to imply that having the jab when infected makes things worse?
You said "because we understand how these things work".
I was pointing out that you do not understand how these things work.
Err, yes we do.
We understand there is essentially no efficacy the week you get the first jab. Jabbed on wednesday, symptomatic on sunday, simply isn't a big enough time window to have ever had the second jab - or for the first jab to start working yet. We do understand that.
Indeed symptomatic on Sunday quite possibly means was infected around Tuesday. Unfortunate timing.
Hope your friends OH gets better ASAP and your friend stays well too RP.
There has been no trial to confirm your assertions.
Yes there has been. The official trial confirmed it.
Jabbed on Wednesday, count that as day 0, symptomatic on Sunday, count that as day 4. In every single trial the data exists to show what happens 4 days after initial jab.
The trial data showed essentially zero efficiacy on day 4. It is to be expected. Not a single person in the trial got a second jab by day 4.
If you were saying nothing has confirmed the impact if you don't get a second jab on day 21 and then there's an infection on day 25 then that would be true. But whether he would or would not receive a second jab on day 21 is immaterial to an infection on day 4 - it was within the original trial parameters.
They were not testing for that and it was not part of the trial design so no.
They were testing for efficacy, and what level of efficacy was achieved, when. Hence graphs like this, in the papers published -
Precisely. Day 4 is before efficacy behins that is in their data.
Had it been day 25 and second dose had been skipped then Topping would have had a point.
It's also silly because there was never under any circumstances going to be a second dose by day 4 so it's meaningless fluff.
I also don't even get where the single jab comment came from.
We are discussing the very first part of this graph during which period (the 1st 10/14 days) there is zero difference between those who received the vaccine and those that received the placebo.
The second jab wouldn't be done before 21 days in the first place and that's been delayed for the reasons I set out last week and yesterday.
Better a 60% chance of protection for 20 people than a 90% chance of protection for 10 people.
And at the moment maximising the number of people protected is the most important issue.
So it would be very useful if Topping actual explained his point rather than sniping from the sidelines.
Has a trial been conducted, by design, to understand efficacy after one dose?
And sidelines? Who are you, Chris Whitty?
Amd what has that to do with the original topic we were talking about? - which was
People catching covid on the day / day before their first vaccination and coming down ill with it a few days later.
None of that has anything to do with the time frame between first and second injections and everything to do with being unlucky enough to catching Covid on approximately the same day their had their first injection.
Gah! This discussion arose because, apropos of @RochdalePioneers telling us about the incidence of infection post first jab, you said:
"The problem with all these stories is that because we understand how these things work we read the story one way."
Which I took to mean: well we know that there can be pre-existing rates of infection when the first jab is administered but the first jab does actually give high rates of immunity.
My point was and is we don't understand how these things work because as far as I'm aware, no trial has been designed and conducted specifically to determine first jab efficacy. Of course there have been data which suggests an answer but no trial AFAIA has been conducted to determine by trial.
Except your "AFAIA" is wrong.
No trial has been designed to test single dose efficiency on an ongoing basis - but a trial was designed to test single dose efficacy from day 0 to day 21.
This was symptomatic on day 4, symptomatic obviously comes days after infection. That is entirely within the definition of what was tested for and determined. Efficacy was demonstrated between days 10 and 21 (but after 21 is unknown) - but no efficacy for day 4. This is entirely and explicitly within the realms of what was tested for.
Have a look at this image and look up at day 4 and see its results. Day 4 is within this chart and what was tested for - what were the results at day 4? Is day 4 the same or different to results day 10-21?
Day 22 onwards there's no data for. There is data for day 4.
Thanks I still don't think the trial was designed to test efficacy after a single dose although as you say it was certainly observed. The press release doesn't mention anything other than divergence after Day 12.
But frankly I can't even remember why it matters here so I will accept that you are all wrong and I, as ever, am right.
Strictly speaking the trial wasn’t designed to test anything more than the primary and secondary endpoints.
But there’s a lot more valid data that can be gleaned from the trial.
Boris just made an obvious observation that of course fish sales across Europe have been hard hit as restaurants and pubs across Europe are currently closed
I had not thought that one, but it is a fair comment
But people are still eating so the fact that restaurants and pubs are closed should have no impact on demand
That rather depends what they are eating. I used to have a regular restaurant meal at an upmarket pub with some mates on a Saturday night. Decent quality food - maybe a slow cooked lamb breast, or roast duck. I can cook pretty well, but haven't always got the energy to bother. On quite a few Saturday nights at the moment I'm probably on frozen pizzas or beans on toast.
I'd imagine that higher value fish is probably particularly badly effected by this - it something with which many people can't be bothered at home, but which often features on restaurant menus. I also don't know how many chip shops are currently shut - my decent local one has closed during this lockdown.
Comments
"His wisdom".
Do you think seasons have played a part around the world. Seasonal sunlight and temperatures? So it looked like good measures having impact/mistakes made, but it was seasons behind it?
Also the whole "losing Scotland" thing isn't a good look if you don't want to sound like a colonialist. And surely most people say "Catalan" not "Catalonian". Weird piece of writing from someone who is paid to edit newspapers for a living.
Draw your boundaries in the place you want them, and you'll always be the winner.
Hopefully.
Rewrite the history books, the Don has spoken.
Navalny, 44, claimed that the Russian leader - who he labels the world's richest man - uses a 'slush fund' to cover the expenses of his other women and their families including his 17-year-old love child.
He has also claimed that Putin has a £1billion palace on the Black Sea with a red velvet pole-dancing boudoir and a casino.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9167475/Putin-slush-fund-pay-mistresses-families-jailed-Alexei-Navalny-claims.html
More generally our local fish van has been noticeably busier thanks to lockdown.
As you can use salary sacrifice for it you can end up with a new I-pace every 6 months for something like £500 a month.
If he learns from some of the underlying motives then the US has a bright future. If he reverts to the deplorables then it's xxxxed and I might even back Trump for 2024.
As to 2024? If Starmer wins, and its still bubbling, he'll set up a constitutional commission and, ultimately, offer a three option referendum with the federalism option being the winner. Voters will split the difference.
Independence? Not in our lifetimes.
It seems that Scotland wants the truth, whether the First Minister can handle it or not.
For the record, I will be very, very surprised if she has. While her husband's dealings look distinctly dodgy, Salmond is behaving more and more like his mate Trump right now and we all know how much truth was found there.
He's a key worker in food. 9 out of 11 people at his place of work have come down with it. It makes you realise what a risk they are all running.
So anyone who goes into these shops without wearing a mask, distancing and sanitising etc is a total and utter selfish shitbag as far as I'm concerned.
Biden just built on her victory
Belatedly, he realises that some goodwill from the incoming administration might not be amiss.
But, remember, we had our very own pb.com idiot who went off skiing at the height of the pandemic in 2020.
How may people at the time called the skiers out for grossly irresponsible behaviour? It is only clear in retrospect.
At the time (March/April 2020) , my recollection is that there was scientific modelling that claimed the effect of shutting the airports would be small.
The main mistake we have repeatedly made is to treat the scientific modelling of what was then an unknown disease of unknown characteristics as though it had real predictive power.
That is not the purpose of modelling.
Take your dog to a European vet on the way home, they charge you €20 for the worming tablet and fill in your pet passport and send you on your way.
Take your dog to an American vet, and they insist you need a full health check before they could even consider signing any paperwork, give him a quick once over, charge you $50, insist that you register with their practice, and then once you are back in the UK send you emails every week thereafter telling you how great are their services.
Ah healing Hillary, bet we're going to see plenty of her now
But then what is the point of a lib dem
Edit: It was Mr T's behaviour when he realised that Mr S wasn't going to bend over that really was revealing. And at that time he was merely a businessman with bad taste in bathroom fittings.
And to introduce sensible but radical ideas into political debate in advance of established politicians being willing to give them the time of day.
Taking the wider historical view, this is a critical role, but I don’t expect you’ll be able to appreciate it.
Edit - although in this case, that's if anything more worrying because the push in that particular poll was clearly to get people to say she should resign - and still a third stuck out and said she shouldn't.
He who is without sin first cast the stone
However, this was being asked by some other mob in the same survey -
https://wingsoverscotland.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/pbqs.jpg
They have lost all their original function through evolution.
Perhaps not calling for the death of your opponents is a small step, but it seems like a start.
Direct your mire toward Big G, who told us, over and over, how bad Boris would be, then voted for him.
https://twitter.com/ropoem/status/1351674944736927745?s=21
But there’s a lot more valid data that can be gleaned from the trial.
I'd imagine that higher value fish is probably particularly badly effected by this - it something with which many people can't be bothered at home, but which often features on restaurant menus. I also don't know how many chip shops are currently shut - my decent local one has closed during this lockdown.