Don't mess with patent, copyright or trademark law unless you know what you are doing, accompanied by a six figure fee.
From the story, it doesn't look like he would ever have had a shot, not least because he openly admitted he was only selling things to tick a box on legal requirements.
Target 15,000,000 Thru 10,143,511 Remaining 4,865,489 Yesterday's total 352,935 Days to target 13
Required rate/day 373,576
If it looks like we might just miss the target, will putting self-administered doses to cover the shortfall in the post count?
England is comfortably ahead of target, should hit well before Valentine's day. No wonder you're starting to get stories of everyon vaccinated by May coming out.
The entire UK vaccine cohort is 52,000,000 by my maths... so...
One jab for all by May Day Bank Holiday
All doses, all four nations
Target 52,000,000 Thru 10,143,511 Remaining 41,856,489 Yesterday's total 352,935 Days to target 91
Required rate/day 459,962
That's quite a bit tougher to do, but you have to say it's possible...
If the supply is available, I think we'll do that easily. Vaccine centres are _still_ being built.
I reckon there will be a 1m day in the next fortnight.
The 3 main issues for the UK program are
1) Supply 2) Supply 3) Supply
While no formal data has been presented, all the information I have come across is that vaccination centres are running at less than full capacity, due to the amount of vaccine they have.
Bad weather is another major issue.
I'm guessing the vaccine figures for today will be lower because of the snow but some in the media will scream 'Vaccine rollout failure.'
The good news is the UK in February is not known for its bad weather.
This morning the Geordie PBers were traipsing through snowdrifts to post. It would not surprise me if part of the slowness in (until recently) Wales and Scotland was weather-related. Northern Ireland, who knows? There are current weather warnings for Scotland and the north.
Geordie PBers use pillar boxes? Whatever next? Do they impress their postings in cuneiform on wet clay?
Edit: silly me. Given where they come from, obvs. carve runes on sticks.
They had sticks? Luuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxurrrrrrrrrrry!
Seriously, though, the weather has been pretty nasty in much of Scotland over the last week or two - I've had to be careful about going out and strap on some rubber/metal studs on my boots. Even the milder weather of late has been tricky in terms of melting and then refreezing the ice.
Don't worry.....NordStream2, SputnikV - Mutti wants to play nice:
twitter.com/axios/status/1356657804925431809?s=20
Why did you break your parole.....I was poisoned and in a coma....off to jail for you son.
Reminds me of some of the Jim Crow era convictions in America.
Racist cops beat an innocent African America with their night sticks.
The African American is charged with destruction and damaging public proper because the coppers hit him so hard they broke their night sticks and he bled on a carpet.
This is the worst mess the EU has got into a very long time, possibly since its inception.
People will die because of this bureaucratic clusterf*ck.
Remainers might pause to reflect on how completely wrong they were, and how right the ordinary people of Britain were. Several times.
Yeah right. That's going to happen.
Are all of "the ordinary people of Britain" in the 52% that voted for Brexit, or might some of "the ordinary people of Britain" be in the 48% that didn't?
I guess they are. And I tell you what, the more ordinary they are, the more likely they are to consider whether they made the correct choice.
People reflecting on how wrong they have been is always a good thing.
[cough] IFR below 0.2% No worse than flu Secret herd immunity already All economists condemn lockdown and restrictions No second wave All False Positives Casedemic No excess deaths NHS at normal levels [cough]
Nasty cough there: you probably ought to get a C-19 test.
This guy's entire timeline is somewhat disturbing. He is a pro clinician and does not seem to have an agenda. I do not have the scientific knowledge to judge if he is right. But, hmm
So blood from 26 people were tested, blood from all showed sufficient antibodies to kill main strain, blood from 7 showed insufficient to beat the Saffer strain.
Now besides the fact it's a lab test and not peer reviewed and a small sample ...
... That shows 100% success against the main variant. ... And 19/26 = 73% success against the Saffer strain.
If your vaccine is 73% successful, let alone 100% successful, then dosing twice as many people is absolutely the right strategy!
This guy's entire timeline is somewhat disturbing. He is a pro clinician and does not seem to have an agenda. I do not have the scientific knowledge to judge if he is right. But, hmm
Just seen this, probably already discussed on here:
"UK compromising safety over Covid-19 vaccine, says Ursula von der Leyen
Britain failed its “gigantic responsibility” to ensure the proper safety of vaccines and the European Union should be proud of its strategy, Ursula von der Leyen said today."
It’s a fairly brave statement to make when the U.K. is starting to see the (positive) results of a 9m person trial.... She’s going to look (even more) foolish.
Is that true tho? Are we already seeing evidence that Oxon-AZ works in the old?
If so, great. If not, when WILL we see the data, good or bad?
Here's some useful data on that, WoW change in the English hospitalisation rate for the two targeted age groups, you can see the fall is accelerating while lockdown conditions have stayed the same.
Thanks, but is that what it shows? Surely we need to compare it to the fall in other age groups.
And isn't that a levelling off at the end? - of course, that could be because every oldie has either now 1. died, and/or 2 had it and survived, and/or 3 been vaxxed
Also, didn't every oldie get Pfizer at the start? All the ones I know did. But I don't know if that is the case nationally
He needs to define how many "outbreaks" and what does he mean by that, and how many within the 21 days...and which vaccines.
Check his Twitter-feed, he has quite a few similar people, pros in care homes, saying Yes we see the same concerning phenomenon
And same with vaccine shortages, we get a load of reports saying yeah we didn't get any either.
I am not saying he is BS, but we know none of these vaccines are 100%, definitely not within 3 weeks. People saying yeah we got an outbreak here, do we know how many have been vaccinated, how long ago they were, with what vaccine.
One thing I have been concerned about is the reports of unwillingness of staff to get jabbed. It would be good to have proper figures on this.
So blood from 26 people were tested, blood from all showed sufficient antibodies to kill main strain, blood from 7 showed insufficient to beat the Saffer strain.
Now besides the fact it's a lab test and not peer reviewed and a small sample ...
... That shows 100% success against the main variant. ... And 19/26 = 73% success against the Saffer strain.
If your vaccine is 73% successful, let alone 100% successful, then dosing twice as many people is absolutely the right strategy!
I hope you are right.
It seems that HMG were correct to delay AZ. But Pfizer? I guess we will find out for sure quite soon, on all counts.
Don't worry.....NordStream2, SputnikV - Mutti wants to play nice:
twitter.com/axios/status/1356657804925431809?s=20
Why did you break your parole.....I was poisoned and in a coma....off to jail for you son.
Reminds me of some of the Jim Crow era convictions in America.
Racist cops beat an innocent African America with their night sticks.
The African American is charged with destruction and damaging public proper because the coppers hit him so hard they broke their night sticks and he bled on a carpet.
One thing to note....Care Homes are overwhelmingly getting AZN vaccine, not Pfizer. The policy regarding should it be 3 weeks or not, is exclusively in regards to Pfizer, AZN have backed a longer dosing strategy.
The latest evidence (linked below) provides further evidence that AZN 2nd dose should be left longer than 3 weeks.
Bit concerned a doctor doesn't know this...unless he does and he is making a political point.
One thing to note....Care Homes are overwhelmingly getting AZN vaccine, not Pfizer. The policy regarding should it be 3 weeks or not, is exclusively in regards to Pfizer.
The latest evidence (linked below) suggests that AZN 2nd dose should be left longer than 3 weeks.
Bit concerned a doctor doesn't know this.
Another thing is very few care homes had the vaccine more than 21 days ago.
The very first AZN dose was 29 days ago. Anyone claiming they've had multiple outbreaks more than 21 days after vaccination ... I'd take with a major pinch of salt. The timeline is very tight for that to be even possible.
He needs to define how many "outbreaks" and what does he mean by that, and how many within the 21 days...and which vaccines.
Check his Twitter-feed, he has quite a few similar people, pros in care homes, saying Yes we see the same concerning phenomenon
Twitter tends towards bullshit. I'd want to see some real news.
There won't be news yet, as with the early days of Covid, the first inklings will be anecdata exactly like this.
If this guy was some random nutter, I'd dismiss him, but he is:
"Consultant Geriatrician Tameside & Glossop, Former NHS National Clinical Director|Clinical Advisor Manchester & London|Leader/occasional follower| Views my own"
with 5000 followers, many of them also medical professionals. He is popular with FBPE types as well, so I guess it is possible he is seeking out bad news subconsciously....
It is quite possible that he is right, and delaying Pfizer has endangered some old people, and yet, at the same time, the government was/is ALSO right, given that - at the time the decision to delay was made - the UK was headed for meltdown. The risk was worth it overall.
One thing to note....Care Homes are overwhelmingly getting AZN vaccine, not Pfizer. The policy regarding should it be 3 weeks or not, is exclusively in regards to Pfizer, AZN have backed a longer dosing strategy.
The latest evidence (linked below) provides further evidence that AZN 2nd dose should be left longer than 3 weeks.
Bit concerned a doctor doesn't know this...unless he does and he is making a political point.
I don't think I've seen/heard the MSM make this point about the two vaccines.
He needs to define how many "outbreaks" and what does he mean by that, and how many within the 21 days...and which vaccines.
Check his Twitter-feed, he has quite a few similar people, pros in care homes, saying Yes we see the same concerning phenomenon
Twitter tends towards bullshit. I'd want to see some real news.
There won't be news yet, as with the early days of Covid, the first inklings will be anecdata exactly like this.
If this guy was some random nutter, I'd dismiss him, but he is:
"Consultant Geriatrician Tameside & Glossop, Former NHS National Clinical Director|Clinical Advisor Manchester & London|Leader/occasional follower| Views my own"
with 5000 followers, many of them also medical professionals. He is popular with FBPE types as well, so I guess it is possible he is seeking out bad news subconsciously....
It is quite possible that he is right, and delaying Pfizer has endangered some old people, and yet, at the same time, the government was/is ALSO right, given that - at the time the decision to delay was made - the UK was headed for meltdown. The risk was worth it overall.
You should worry that somebody with those qualification links to an article about Pfizer dosing strategy, yet is talking about care homes, that get AZN.
So blood from 26 people were tested, blood from all showed sufficient antibodies to kill main strain, blood from 7 showed insufficient to beat the Saffer strain.
Now besides the fact it's a lab test and not peer reviewed and a small sample ...
... That shows 100% success against the main variant. ... And 19/26 = 73% success against the Saffer strain.
If your vaccine is 73% successful, let alone 100% successful, then dosing twice as many people is absolutely the right strategy!
I hope you are right.
It seems that HMG were correct to delay AZ. But Pfizer? I guess we will find out for sure quite soon, on all counts.
AZ has NOT been delayed - 12 weeks was the best indication out of the trial data. Have to scotch this myth every time it rears it head.
I really hope our media use some level of caution on these stories about people who have been vaccinated and get COVID. There are going to be lots that do, that's how the maths of vaccinating millions of people with something that isn't anywhere near 100% for many weeks (and even then still significantly sort of that).
We will unfortunately get people who still die from COVID despite having the Pfizer jab or the AZN jab etc.
So blood from 26 people were tested, blood from all showed sufficient antibodies to kill main strain, blood from 7 showed insufficient to beat the Saffer strain.
Now besides the fact it's a lab test and not peer reviewed and a small sample ...
... That shows 100% success against the main variant. ... And 19/26 = 73% success against the Saffer strain.
If your vaccine is 73% successful, let alone 100% successful, then dosing twice as many people is absolutely the right strategy!
I hope you are right.
It seems that HMG were correct to delay AZ. But Pfizer? I guess we will find out for sure quite soon, on all counts.
AZ has NOT been delayed - 12 weeks was the best indication out of the trial data. Have to scotch this myth every time it rears it head.
Is that true? I stand corrected. A lot of confusing info around
So blood from 26 people were tested, blood from all showed sufficient antibodies to kill main strain, blood from 7 showed insufficient to beat the Saffer strain.
Now besides the fact it's a lab test and not peer reviewed and a small sample ...
... That shows 100% success against the main variant. ... And 19/26 = 73% success against the Saffer strain.
If your vaccine is 73% successful, let alone 100% successful, then dosing twice as many people is absolutely the right strategy!
I hope you are right.
It seems that HMG were correct to delay AZ. But Pfizer? I guess we will find out for sure quite soon, on all counts.
AZ has NOT been delayed - 12 weeks was the best indication out of the trial data. Have to scotch this myth every time it rears it head.
Is that true? I stand corrected. A lot of confusing info around
Given some are delibately seeking to confuse it, that's not a surprise.
One thing to note....Care Homes are overwhelmingly getting AZN vaccine, not Pfizer. The policy regarding should it be 3 weeks or not, is exclusively in regards to Pfizer, AZN have backed a longer dosing strategy.
The latest evidence (linked below) provides further evidence that AZN 2nd dose should be left longer than 3 weeks.
Bit concerned a doctor doesn't know this...unless he does and he is making a political point.
I don't think I've seen/heard the MSM make this point about the two vaccines.
I fear it will be unlikely they will make this important distinction when it comes to reports of those being infected post vaccination.
So blood from 26 people were tested, blood from all showed sufficient antibodies to kill main strain, blood from 7 showed insufficient to beat the Saffer strain.
Now besides the fact it's a lab test and not peer reviewed and a small sample ...
... That shows 100% success against the main variant. ... And 19/26 = 73% success against the Saffer strain.
If your vaccine is 73% successful, let alone 100% successful, then dosing twice as many people is absolutely the right strategy!
I hope you are right.
It seems that HMG were correct to delay AZ. But Pfizer? I guess we will find out for sure quite soon, on all counts.
AZ has NOT been delayed - 12 weeks was the best indication out of the trial data. Have to scotch this myth every time it rears it head.
Is that true? I stand corrected. A lot of confusing info around
Yes. Absolubtely, antibody production with 12 week regime is miles better than 3
So blood from 26 people were tested, blood from all showed sufficient antibodies to kill main strain, blood from 7 showed insufficient to beat the Saffer strain.
Now besides the fact it's a lab test and not peer reviewed and a small sample ...
... That shows 100% success against the main variant. ... And 19/26 = 73% success against the Saffer strain.
If your vaccine is 73% successful, let alone 100% successful, then dosing twice as many people is absolutely the right strategy!
I hope you are right.
It seems that HMG were correct to delay AZ. But Pfizer? I guess we will find out for sure quite soon, on all counts.
AZ has NOT been delayed - 12 weeks was the best indication out of the trial data. Have to scotch this myth every time it rears it head.
Is that true? I stand corrected. A lot of confusing info around
Yes, for AZ the 12 week gap gives the best immune response. What's interesting is that this latest data has trials in Brazil and SA and the 12 week dosing strategy gives 85% efficacy including those two strains.
This could be a huge break for the UK, absolutely massive. The Ox-AZ vaccine really could be the best thing that has ever come out of this country.
One thing to note....Care Homes are overwhelmingly getting AZN vaccine, not Pfizer. The policy regarding should it be 3 weeks or not, is exclusively in regards to Pfizer, AZN have backed a longer dosing strategy.
The latest evidence (linked below) provides further evidence that AZN 2nd dose should be left longer than 3 weeks.
Bit concerned a doctor doesn't know this...unless he does and he is making a political point.
I don't think I've seen/heard the MSM make this point about the two vaccines.
I fear it will be unlikely they will make this important distinction when it comes to reports of those being infected post vaccination.
Covid infections between Pfizer 12 week regime days 22 and 84 are the game in town we need data for. And antibody production after 2nd dose on each regime
So blood from 26 people were tested, blood from all showed sufficient antibodies to kill main strain, blood from 7 showed insufficient to beat the Saffer strain.
Now besides the fact it's a lab test and not peer reviewed and a small sample ...
... That shows 100% success against the main variant. ... And 19/26 = 73% success against the Saffer strain.
If your vaccine is 73% successful, let alone 100% successful, then dosing twice as many people is absolutely the right strategy!
I hope you are right.
It seems that HMG were correct to delay AZ. But Pfizer? I guess we will find out for sure quite soon, on all counts.
AZ has NOT been delayed - 12 weeks was the best indication out of the trial data. Have to scotch this myth every time it rears it head.
Is that true? I stand corrected. A lot of confusing info around
Given some are delibately seeking to confuse it, that's not a surprise.
The other thing is that whilst we are in lockdown and cases are decreasing, the dodgy mutation isn't likely to spread very far.
It might become a problem if it transmits better and we unlock to such a point that R=1 or thereabouts.
That would be a perfect scenario for creating more mutants given the important SA mutation seems to be occurring spontaneously in lots of places.
The virus wants to live!
Another vaccine will be needed sooner rather than later.
"Geoff Butcher, who runs a group of six care homes in the Midlands, said it had completed inoculation of all its residents over a week ago. However, in one of its homes more than half the residents had recently tested positive for the virus in an outbreak that had started three weeks after receiving the Pfizer vaccine."
So care homes ARE getting Pfizer
Also:
"Martin Green, chief executive of Care England, which represents care home operators, praised the speed and effectiveness of the rollout. But he added that a second dose within a shorter timescale “might help protect those most at risk of severe disease and mortality and also alleviate the burden upon the NHS by preventing hospitalisation”. Care England is also seeking assurances that there will be adequate supplies of the second dose."
"Deaths in care homes with Covid-19 on the death certificate have risen by about a third in England and Wales over the past week."
And here's that Vernon guy again:
"Martin Vernon, a consultant geriatrician in Greater Manchester and formerly a senior official in charge of care for older people at NHS England, said he had recently seen “a substantial outbreak” in a fully vaccinated care home that would have been due for the second dose round about now, within the 21 day interval. “Unfortunately some of those people are now very poorly,” he added.
"Prof Vernon likened the choice to go against the three week dosing interval tested by Pfizer during clinical trials, to the decision, about a year ago, to move people out of hospital and into care homes without testing them for the disease, helping to spread the virus.
“We are knowingly being instructed to expose one of the most vulnerable groups a second time around to a level of risk that we cannot easily quantify but can anticipate to be higher than if we had followed the available scientific evidence,” Prof Vernon said."
He needs to define how many "outbreaks" and what does he mean by that, and how many within the 21 days...and which vaccines.
Check his Twitter-feed, he has quite a few similar people, pros in care homes, saying Yes we see the same concerning phenomenon
Yes, but most of them definitely do have an agenda, and some of them are quoting cases within days of the people being vaccinated, which suggests that one can't have entire confidence in their understanding.
I do wonder, though, whether there might be a problem of the vaccination teams bringing infection in to the homes?
"Geoff Butcher, who runs a group of six care homes in the Midlands, said it had completed inoculation of all its residents over a week ago. However, in one of its homes more than half the residents had recently tested positive for the virus in an outbreak that had started three weeks after receiving the Pfizer vaccine."
So care homes ARE getting Pfizer
Also:
"Martin Green, chief executive of Care England, which represents care home operators, praised the speed and effectiveness of the rollout. But he added that a second dose within a shorter timescale “might help protect those most at risk of severe disease and mortality and also alleviate the burden upon the NHS by preventing hospitalisation”. Care England is also seeking assurances that there will be adequate supplies of the second dose."
"Deaths in care homes with Covid-19 on the death certificate have risen by about a third in England and Wales over the past week."
And here's that Vernon guy again:
"Martin Vernon, a consultant geriatrician in Greater Manchester and formerly a senior official in charge of care for older people at NHS England, said he had recently seen “a substantial outbreak” in a fully vaccinated care home that would have been due for the second dose round about now, within the 21 day interval. “Unfortunately some of those people are now very poorly,” he added.
"Prof Vernon likened the choice to go against the three week dosing interval tested by Pfizer during clinical trials, to the decision, about a year ago, to move people out of hospital and into care homes without testing them for the disease, helping to spread the virus.
“We are knowingly being instructed to expose one of the most vulnerable groups a second time around to a level of risk that we cannot easily quantify but can anticipate to be higher than if we had followed the available scientific evidence,” Prof Vernon said."
He needs to define how many "outbreaks" and what does he mean by that, and how many within the 21 days...and which vaccines.
And does it end up with people needing to go to hospitals.
Well, some of them died!
It does sound as if what is being reported is outbreaks a week or two after vaccination. So more likely to be caught at the time of vaccination than anything else.
We should have data in a months time as to how effective single dose is the real world. 🤞
This us getting very 'Comical Ali' but it just is not comical
When is someone in the EU going to just hook her off the stage
UVDL, Germany and France actions and words are just inexcusable
She is defaming the UK's medicines regulator. On what basis? It's dreadful behaviour.
On the basis that making the MHRA appear indecently hasty is meant to make the process that she has overseen look prudent, rather than excessively slow, of course. It's arse covering.
He needs to define how many "outbreaks" and what does he mean by that, and how many within the 21 days...and which vaccines.
Check his Twitter-feed, he has quite a few similar people, pros in care homes, saying Yes we see the same concerning phenomenon
Yes, but most of them definitely do have an agenda, and some of them are quoting cases within days of the people being vaccinated, which suggests that one can't have entire confidence in their understanding.
I do wonder, though, whether there might be a problem of the vaccination teams bringing infection in to the homes?
IT will be ironic, but very worrying, if the UK proves to be completely right about Oxon-AZ, but has made a terrible error in delaying Pfizer.
The company did say we have no evidence this delay will work.
This us getting very 'Comical Ali' but it just is not comical
When is someone in the EU going to just hook her off the stage
UVDL, Germany and France actions and words are just inexcusable
She is defaming the UK's medicines regulator. On what basis? It's dreadful behaviour.
On the basis that making the MHRA appear indecently hasty is meant to make the process that she has overseen look prudent, rather than excessively slow, of course. It's arse covering.
If it causes the collapse of the Dutch and Portuguese health systems, it will not be seen as prudent.
He needs to define how many "outbreaks" and what does he mean by that, and how many within the 21 days...and which vaccines.
Check his Twitter-feed, he has quite a few similar people, pros in care homes, saying Yes we see the same concerning phenomenon
Yes, but most of them definitely do have an agenda, and some of them are quoting cases within days of the people being vaccinated, which suggests that one can't have entire confidence in their understanding.
I do wonder, though, whether there might be a problem of the vaccination teams bringing infection in to the homes?
IT will be ironic, but very worrying, if the UK proves to be completely right about Oxon-AZ, but has made a terrible error in delaying Pfizer.
The company did say we have no evidence this delay will work.
The reasoning for why it might, and the calculation of risk of more people partially protected vs fewer fully protected, remains, at present, sound. It was never without risk, but nor was it a 50/50 shot necessarily. As Foxy says we'll have more data later.
He needs to define how many "outbreaks" and what does he mean by that, and how many within the 21 days...and which vaccines.
And does it end up with people needing to go to hospitals.
Well, some of them died!
It does sound as if what is being reported is outbreaks a week or two after vaccination. So more likely to be caught at the time of vaccination than anything else.
We should have data in a months time as to how effective single dose is the real world. 🤞
Yes, I just read the article, it does seem as though there is a big bit of 2+2=5 in their assumptions.
He needs to define how many "outbreaks" and what does he mean by that, and how many within the 21 days...and which vaccines.
Check his Twitter-feed, he has quite a few similar people, pros in care homes, saying Yes we see the same concerning phenomenon
Yes, but most of them definitely do have an agenda, and some of them are quoting cases within days of the people being vaccinated, which suggests that one can't have entire confidence in their understanding.
I do wonder, though, whether there might be a problem of the vaccination teams bringing infection in to the homes?
IT will be ironic, but very worrying, if the UK proves to be completely right about Oxon-AZ, but has made a terrible error in delaying Pfizer.
The company did say we have no evidence this delay will work.
The reasoning for why it might, and the calculation of risk of more people partially protected vs fewer fully protected, remains, at present, sound. It was never without risk, but nor was it a 50/50 shot.
The UK took a series of calculated risks, all of them justified, to my mind. One of them might have turned out badly.
He needs to define how many "outbreaks" and what does he mean by that, and how many within the 21 days...and which vaccines.
Check his Twitter-feed, he has quite a few similar people, pros in care homes, saying Yes we see the same concerning phenomenon
Yes, but most of them definitely do have an agenda, and some of them are quoting cases within days of the people being vaccinated, which suggests that one can't have entire confidence in their understanding.
I do wonder, though, whether there might be a problem of the vaccination teams bringing infection in to the homes?
IT will be ironic, but very worrying, if the UK proves to be completely right about Oxon-AZ, but has made a terrible error in delaying Pfizer.
The company did say we have no evidence this delay will work.
Although if they’re getting the disease a fortnight after vaccination, then the recommendation for a 3-4 week gap (whichever it was) would have made no difference anyway.
That being said, surely now is the moment to use our existing Pfizer stock for second jabs and switch to AZ full time, in case those nutters at the Commission actually do seize Pfizer’s supply as they’re threatening to.
This us getting very 'Comical Ali' but it just is not comical
When is someone in the EU going to just hook her off the stage
UVDL, Germany and France actions and words are just inexcusable
She is defaming the UK's medicines regulator. On what basis? It's dreadful behaviour.
On the basis that making the MHRA appear indecently hasty is meant to make the process that she has overseen look prudent, rather than excessively slow, of course. It's arse covering.
If it causes the collapse of the Dutch and Portuguese health systems, it will not be seen as prudent.
Oh, if that happens then I imagine that we'll be blamed for it.
So blood from 26 people were tested, blood from all showed sufficient antibodies to kill main strain, blood from 7 showed insufficient to beat the Saffer strain.
Now besides the fact it's a lab test and not peer reviewed and a small sample ...
... That shows 100% success against the main variant. ... And 19/26 = 73% success against the Saffer strain.
If your vaccine is 73% successful, let alone 100% successful, then dosing twice as many people is absolutely the right strategy!
I hope you are right.
It seems that HMG were correct to delay AZ. But Pfizer? I guess we will find out for sure quite soon, on all counts.
AZ has NOT been delayed - 12 weeks was the best indication out of the trial data. Have to scotch this myth every time it rears it head.
Is that true? I stand corrected. A lot of confusing info around
Given some are delibately seeking to confuse it, that's not a surprise.
The other thing is that whilst we are in lockdown and cases are decreasing, the dodgy mutation isn't likely to spread very far.
It might become a problem if it transmits better and we unlock to such a point that R=1 or thereabouts.
That would be a perfect scenario for creating more mutants given the important SA mutation seems to be occurring spontaneously in lots of places.
The virus wants to live!
Another vaccine will be needed sooner rather than later.
I wouldn't anthromorphise the virus. It is not sentient.
It does seem to be exhibiting the phenomenon of convergent evolution.
On this subject two things are true at the same time. Every death is equally tragic. But the death of a 10 year old is more tragic than the death of someone over 90. A philosophical paradox.
"Geoff Butcher, who runs a group of six care homes in the Midlands, said it had completed inoculation of all its residents over a week ago. However, in one of its homes more than half the residents had recently tested positive for the virus in an outbreak that had started three weeks after receiving the Pfizer vaccine."
So care homes ARE getting Pfizer
Also:
"Martin Green, chief executive of Care England, which represents care home operators, praised the speed and effectiveness of the rollout. But he added that a second dose within a shorter timescale “might help protect those most at risk of severe disease and mortality and also alleviate the burden upon the NHS by preventing hospitalisation”. Care England is also seeking assurances that there will be adequate supplies of the second dose."
"Deaths in care homes with Covid-19 on the death certificate have risen by about a third in England and Wales over the past week."
And here's that Vernon guy again:
"Martin Vernon, a consultant geriatrician in Greater Manchester and formerly a senior official in charge of care for older people at NHS England, said he had recently seen “a substantial outbreak” in a fully vaccinated care home that would have been due for the second dose round about now, within the 21 day interval. “Unfortunately some of those people are now very poorly,” he added.
"Prof Vernon likened the choice to go against the three week dosing interval tested by Pfizer during clinical trials, to the decision, about a year ago, to move people out of hospital and into care homes without testing them for the disease, helping to spread the virus.
“We are knowingly being instructed to expose one of the most vulnerable groups a second time around to a level of risk that we cannot easily quantify but can anticipate to be higher than if we had followed the available scientific evidence,” Prof Vernon said."
Let's hope Ursula VDL hasn't got something accidentally right
It's also entirely possible that the single dose strategy is right for the country as a whole, and helps get the outbreak under control earlier, but is wrong for care homes.
And then it becomes - as it always is - a question of how best to ratio a scarce resource.
This us getting very 'Comical Ali' but it just is not comical
When is someone in the EU going to just hook her off the stage
UVDL, Germany and France actions and words are just inexcusable
She is defaming the UK's medicines regulator. On what basis? It's dreadful behaviour.
On the basis that making the MHRA appear indecently hasty is meant to make the process that she has overseen look prudent, rather than excessively slow, of course. It's arse covering.
If it causes the collapse of the Dutch and Portuguese health systems, it will not be seen as prudent.
The Dutch are doing OK. Deaths and cases falling away.
"Geoff Butcher, who runs a group of six care homes in the Midlands, said it had completed inoculation of all its residents over a week ago. However, in one of its homes more than half the residents had recently tested positive for the virus in an outbreak that had started three weeks after receiving the Pfizer vaccine."
So care homes ARE getting Pfizer
Also:
"Martin Green, chief executive of Care England, which represents care home operators, praised the speed and effectiveness of the rollout. But he added that a second dose within a shorter timescale “might help protect those most at risk of severe disease and mortality and also alleviate the burden upon the NHS by preventing hospitalisation”. Care England is also seeking assurances that there will be adequate supplies of the second dose."
"Deaths in care homes with Covid-19 on the death certificate have risen by about a third in England and Wales over the past week."
And here's that Vernon guy again:
"Martin Vernon, a consultant geriatrician in Greater Manchester and formerly a senior official in charge of care for older people at NHS England, said he had recently seen “a substantial outbreak” in a fully vaccinated care home that would have been due for the second dose round about now, within the 21 day interval. “Unfortunately some of those people are now very poorly,” he added.
"Prof Vernon likened the choice to go against the three week dosing interval tested by Pfizer during clinical trials, to the decision, about a year ago, to move people out of hospital and into care homes without testing them for the disease, helping to spread the virus.
“We are knowingly being instructed to expose one of the most vulnerable groups a second time around to a level of risk that we cannot easily quantify but can anticipate to be higher than if we had followed the available scientific evidence,” Prof Vernon said."
Let's hope Ursula VDL hasn't got something accidentally right
It's also entirely possible that the single dose strategy is right for the country as a whole, and helps get the outbreak under control earlier, but is wrong for care homes.
And then it becomes - as it always is - a question of how best to ratio a scarce resource.
Yes, indeed. And now I must mask up and go shopping. Later
So blood from 26 people were tested, blood from all showed sufficient antibodies to kill main strain, blood from 7 showed insufficient to beat the Saffer strain.
Now besides the fact it's a lab test and not peer reviewed and a small sample ...
... That shows 100% success against the main variant. ... And 19/26 = 73% success against the Saffer strain.
If your vaccine is 73% successful, let alone 100% successful, then dosing twice as many people is absolutely the right strategy!
I hope you are right.
It seems that HMG were correct to delay AZ. But Pfizer? I guess we will find out for sure quite soon, on all counts.
AZ has NOT been delayed - 12 weeks was the best indication out of the trial data. Have to scotch this myth every time it rears it head.
Is that true? I stand corrected. A lot of confusing info around
Given some are delibately seeking to confuse it, that's not a surprise.
The other thing is that whilst we are in lockdown and cases are decreasing, the dodgy mutation isn't likely to spread very far.
It might become a problem if it transmits better and we unlock to such a point that R=1 or thereabouts.
That would be a perfect scenario for creating more mutants given the important SA mutation seems to be occurring spontaneously in lots of places.
The virus wants to live!
Another vaccine will be needed sooner rather than later.
I wouldn't anthromorphise the virus. It is not sentient..
Although that still leaves it smarter than Ursula von der Leyen.
"Martin Vernon, a consultant geriatrician in Greater Manchester and formerly a senior official in charge of care for older people at NHS England, said he had recently seen “a substantial outbreak” in a fully vaccinated care home that would have been due for the second dose round about now, within the 21 day interval. “Unfortunately some of those people are now very poorly,” he added.
A hack pushing an agenda, not an official looking for independent data with an open mind.
If they would have been due for the second dose round about now, they were not due it yet.
If the breakout happened "within" the 21 days then they were not due it yet.
Nothing that occurs "within" the 21 day window is affected by the decision to delay the second dose.
He needs to define how many "outbreaks" and what does he mean by that, and how many within the 21 days...and which vaccines.
Check his Twitter-feed, he has quite a few similar people, pros in care homes, saying Yes we see the same concerning phenomenon
Yes, but most of them definitely do have an agenda, and some of them are quoting cases within days of the people being vaccinated, which suggests that one can't have entire confidence in their understanding.
I do wonder, though, whether there might be a problem of the vaccination teams bringing infection in to the homes?
IT will be ironic, but very worrying, if the UK proves to be completely right about Oxon-AZ, but has made a terrible error in delaying Pfizer.
The company did say we have no evidence this delay will work.
There's pretty good evidence that it works after one dose - you can see it in the clinical-trial data. (The protection may not last so long without the second dose, but that's not relevant to the current discussion).
However, the protection doesn't show up until around two weeks after the jab:
Just seen this, probably already discussed on here:
"UK compromising safety over Covid-19 vaccine, says Ursula von der Leyen
Britain failed its “gigantic responsibility” to ensure the proper safety of vaccines and the European Union should be proud of its strategy, Ursula von der Leyen said today."
It’s a fairly brave statement to make when the U.K. is starting to see the (positive) results of a 9m person trial.... She’s going to look (even more) foolish.
Is that true tho? Are we already seeing evidence that Oxon-AZ works in the old?
If so, great. If not, when WILL we see the data, good or bad?
Here's some useful data on that, WoW change in the English hospitalisation rate for the two targeted age groups, you can see the fall is accelerating while lockdown conditions have stayed the same.
Thanks, but is that what it shows? Surely we need to compare it to the fall in other age groups.
And isn't that a levelling off at the end? - of course, that could be because every oldie has either now 1. died, and/or 2 had it and survived, and/or 3 been vaxxed
Also, didn't every oldie get Pfizer at the start? All the ones I know did. But I don't know if that is the case nationally
If there were a levelling off it would be represented by the line going back up again.
On this subject two things are true at the same time. Every death is equally tragic. But the death of a 10 year old is more tragic than the death of someone over 90. A philosophical paradox.
Yep, but if I’d spent the last year being a professional Covid wanker over tens of thousands of deaths, I’d probably haud back on public piety over the ‘terrible news’ of the death of a hundred year old man with Covid.
"Geoff Butcher, who runs a group of six care homes in the Midlands, said it had completed inoculation of all its residents over a week ago. However, in one of its homes more than half the residents had recently tested positive for the virus in an outbreak that had started three weeks after receiving the Pfizer vaccine."
So care homes ARE getting Pfizer
Also:
"Martin Green, chief executive of Care England, which represents care home operators, praised the speed and effectiveness of the rollout. But he added that a second dose within a shorter timescale “might help protect those most at risk of severe disease and mortality and also alleviate the burden upon the NHS by preventing hospitalisation”. Care England is also seeking assurances that there will be adequate supplies of the second dose."
"Deaths in care homes with Covid-19 on the death certificate have risen by about a third in England and Wales over the past week."
And here's that Vernon guy again:
"Martin Vernon, a consultant geriatrician in Greater Manchester and formerly a senior official in charge of care for older people at NHS England, said he had recently seen “a substantial outbreak” in a fully vaccinated care home that would have been due for the second dose round about now, within the 21 day interval. “Unfortunately some of those people are now very poorly,” he added.
"Prof Vernon likened the choice to go against the three week dosing interval tested by Pfizer during clinical trials, to the decision, about a year ago, to move people out of hospital and into care homes without testing them for the disease, helping to spread the virus.
“We are knowingly being instructed to expose one of the most vulnerable groups a second time around to a level of risk that we cannot easily quantify but can anticipate to be higher than if we had followed the available scientific evidence,” Prof Vernon said."
Let's hope Ursula VDL hasn't got something accidentally right
It's also entirely possible that the single dose strategy is right for the country as a whole, and helps get the outbreak under control earlier, but is wrong for care homes.
And then it becomes - as it always is - a question of how best to ratio a scarce resource.
And it's quite possible that the appropriate strategy is different in different countries. That whilst the UK's punts were more than reasonable given where we were last month, the reward bit of the risk/reward calculation looks different if you start in a different place.
(Do I need to add the bits about Bingham for PM, vdL for something less challenging?)
So blood from 26 people were tested, blood from all showed sufficient antibodies to kill main strain, blood from 7 showed insufficient to beat the Saffer strain.
Now besides the fact it's a lab test and not peer reviewed and a small sample ...
... That shows 100% success against the main variant. ... And 19/26 = 73% success against the Saffer strain.
If your vaccine is 73% successful, let alone 100% successful, then dosing twice as many people is absolutely the right strategy!
I hope you are right.
It seems that HMG were correct to delay AZ. But Pfizer? I guess we will find out for sure quite soon, on all counts.
AZ has NOT been delayed - 12 weeks was the best indication out of the trial data. Have to scotch this myth every time it rears it head.
Is that true? I stand corrected. A lot of confusing info around
Given some are delibately seeking to confuse it, that's not a surprise.
The other thing is that whilst we are in lockdown and cases are decreasing, the dodgy mutation isn't likely to spread very far.
It might become a problem if it transmits better and we unlock to such a point that R=1 or thereabouts.
That would be a perfect scenario for creating more mutants given the important SA mutation seems to be occurring spontaneously in lots of places.
The virus wants to live!
Another vaccine will be needed sooner rather than later.
I wouldn't anthromorphise the virus. It is not sentient..
Although that still leaves it smarter than Ursula von der Leyen.
I think it necessary to distinguish between intelligence (which she certainly has) and judgement.
I know lots of intelligent people who make poor decisions. I see them every day in clinic.
It's really desperate stuff coming out of the EU. Beyond unacceptable.
There appear to be no sane voices left over there able to say "Serioulsy guys - you are looking profoundly foolish. Each utterance is proving so counter-productive. STFU."
"Martin Vernon, a consultant geriatrician in Greater Manchester and formerly a senior official in charge of care for older people at NHS England, said he had recently seen “a substantial outbreak” in a fully vaccinated care home that would have been due for the second dose round about now, within the 21 day interval. “Unfortunately some of those people are now very poorly,” he added.
A hack pushing an agenda, not an official looking for independent data with an open mind.
If they would have been due for the second dose round about now, they were not due it yet.
If the breakout happened "within" the 21 days then they were not due it yet.
Nothing that occurs "within" the 21 day window is affected by the decision to delay the second dose.
Twenty-one *days*? Hey man, I don't wanna rain on your parade, but we're not gonna last twenty-one *hours*! Those viruses are gonna come in here just like they did before. And they're gonna come in here and they're gonna come in here AND THEY'RE GONNA GET US!
So blood from 26 people were tested, blood from all showed sufficient antibodies to kill main strain, blood from 7 showed insufficient to beat the Saffer strain.
Now besides the fact it's a lab test and not peer reviewed and a small sample ...
... That shows 100% success against the main variant. ... And 19/26 = 73% success against the Saffer strain.
If your vaccine is 73% successful, let alone 100% successful, then dosing twice as many people is absolutely the right strategy!
I hope you are right.
It seems that HMG were correct to delay AZ. But Pfizer? I guess we will find out for sure quite soon, on all counts.
AZ has NOT been delayed - 12 weeks was the best indication out of the trial data. Have to scotch this myth every time it rears it head.
Is that true? I stand corrected. A lot of confusing info around
Given some are delibately seeking to confuse it, that's not a surprise.
The other thing is that whilst we are in lockdown and cases are decreasing, the dodgy mutation isn't likely to spread very far.
It might become a problem if it transmits better and we unlock to such a point that R=1 or thereabouts.
That would be a perfect scenario for creating more mutants given the important SA mutation seems to be occurring spontaneously in lots of places.
The virus wants to live!
Another vaccine will be needed sooner rather than later.
I wouldn't anthromorphise the virus. It is not sentient.
It does seem to be exhibiting the phenomenon of convergent evolution.
Which would suggest that there are few other ecological niches for the virus to fill. Possibly it has no other direction to go.
I wonder if humans are sentient half the time so I wouldn't worry about the anthropomorphism...
It is an interesting question though. Is there a "local maximum" of transmission after which spike protein mutation essentially stops or is there an endless stream of mutations which follow one after another?
We are definitely forcing evolution at the moment so might find out sooner rather than later.
"Geoff Butcher, who runs a group of six care homes in the Midlands, said it had completed inoculation of all its residents over a week ago. However, in one of its homes more than half the residents had recently tested positive for the virus in an outbreak that had started three weeks after receiving the Pfizer vaccine."
So care homes ARE getting Pfizer
Also:
"Martin Green, chief executive of Care England, which represents care home operators, praised the speed and effectiveness of the rollout. But he added that a second dose within a shorter timescale “might help protect those most at risk of severe disease and mortality and also alleviate the burden upon the NHS by preventing hospitalisation”. Care England is also seeking assurances that there will be adequate supplies of the second dose."
"Deaths in care homes with Covid-19 on the death certificate have risen by about a third in England and Wales over the past week."
And here's that Vernon guy again:
"Martin Vernon, a consultant geriatrician in Greater Manchester and formerly a senior official in charge of care for older people at NHS England, said he had recently seen “a substantial outbreak” in a fully vaccinated care home that would have been due for the second dose round about now, within the 21 day interval. “Unfortunately some of those people are now very poorly,” he added.
"Prof Vernon likened the choice to go against the three week dosing interval tested by Pfizer during clinical trials, to the decision, about a year ago, to move people out of hospital and into care homes without testing them for the disease, helping to spread the virus.
“We are knowingly being instructed to expose one of the most vulnerable groups a second time around to a level of risk that we cannot easily quantify but can anticipate to be higher than if we had followed the available scientific evidence,” Prof Vernon said."
Let's hope Ursula VDL hasn't got something accidentally right
It's also entirely possible that the single dose strategy is right for the country as a whole, and helps get the outbreak under control earlier, but is wrong for care homes.
And then it becomes - as it always is - a question of how best to ratio a scarce resource.
Presumably they would know if any of the vaccination team had subsequently tested positive.
Given that the logistics of the Pfizer vaccine aren't the easiest to set up, my first thought would be whether there's any possibility that the procedure for getting the vaccine to the residents fell somewhat short.
"Martin Vernon, a consultant geriatrician in Greater Manchester and formerly a senior official in charge of care for older people at NHS England, said he had recently seen “a substantial outbreak” in a fully vaccinated care home that would have been due for the second dose round about now, within the 21 day interval. “Unfortunately some of those people are now very poorly,” he added.
A hack pushing an agenda, not an official looking for independent data with an open mind.
If they would have been due for the second dose round about now, they were not due it yet.
If the breakout happened "within" the 21 days then they were not due it yet.
Nothing that occurs "within" the 21 day window is affected by the decision to delay the second dose.
Twenty-one *days*? Hey man, I don't wanna rain on your parade, but we're not gonna last twenty-one *hours*! Those viruses are gonna come in here just like they did before. And they're gonna come in here and they're gonna come in here AND THEY'RE GONNA GET US!
But they are worth millions to the bio-weapons division.
So blood from 26 people were tested, blood from all showed sufficient antibodies to kill main strain, blood from 7 showed insufficient to beat the Saffer strain.
Now besides the fact it's a lab test and not peer reviewed and a small sample ...
... That shows 100% success against the main variant. ... And 19/26 = 73% success against the Saffer strain.
If your vaccine is 73% successful, let alone 100% successful, then dosing twice as many people is absolutely the right strategy!
I hope you are right.
It seems that HMG were correct to delay AZ. But Pfizer? I guess we will find out for sure quite soon, on all counts.
AZ has NOT been delayed - 12 weeks was the best indication out of the trial data. Have to scotch this myth every time it rears it head.
Is that true? I stand corrected. A lot of confusing info around
Given some are delibately seeking to confuse it, that's not a surprise.
The other thing is that whilst we are in lockdown and cases are decreasing, the dodgy mutation isn't likely to spread very far.
It might become a problem if it transmits better and we unlock to such a point that R=1 or thereabouts.
That would be a perfect scenario for creating more mutants given the important SA mutation seems to be occurring spontaneously in lots of places.
The virus wants to live!
Another vaccine will be needed sooner rather than later.
I wouldn't anthromorphise the virus. It is not sentient..
Although that still leaves it smarter than Ursula von der Leyen.
I think it necessary to distinguish between intelligence (which she certainly has) and judgement.
I know lots of intelligent people who make poor decisions. I see them every day in clinic.
"Geoff Butcher, who runs a group of six care homes in the Midlands, said it had completed inoculation of all its residents over a week ago. However, in one of its homes more than half the residents had recently tested positive for the virus in an outbreak that had started three weeks after receiving the Pfizer vaccine."
So care homes ARE getting Pfizer
Also:
"Martin Green, chief executive of Care England, which represents care home operators, praised the speed and effectiveness of the rollout. But he added that a second dose within a shorter timescale “might help protect those most at risk of severe disease and mortality and also alleviate the burden upon the NHS by preventing hospitalisation”. Care England is also seeking assurances that there will be adequate supplies of the second dose."
"Deaths in care homes with Covid-19 on the death certificate have risen by about a third in England and Wales over the past week."
And here's that Vernon guy again:
"Martin Vernon, a consultant geriatrician in Greater Manchester and formerly a senior official in charge of care for older people at NHS England, said he had recently seen “a substantial outbreak” in a fully vaccinated care home that would have been due for the second dose round about now, within the 21 day interval. “Unfortunately some of those people are now very poorly,” he added.
"Prof Vernon likened the choice to go against the three week dosing interval tested by Pfizer during clinical trials, to the decision, about a year ago, to move people out of hospital and into care homes without testing them for the disease, helping to spread the virus.
“We are knowingly being instructed to expose one of the most vulnerable groups a second time around to a level of risk that we cannot easily quantify but can anticipate to be higher than if we had followed the available scientific evidence,” Prof Vernon said."
Let's hope Ursula VDL hasn't got something accidentally right
If the outbreak is already substantial 21 days after the first dose then its likely that it began within 14 days of the first dose ie before the first dose began to have an effect.
For there to be problems with delaying the second dose then infection needs to take place five weeks after the first dose and two weeks after when a second dose could have been given.
On this subject two things are true at the same time. Every death is equally tragic. But the death of a 10 year old is more tragic than the death of someone over 90. A philosophical paradox.
In fairness, this Felton character is being an absolute bell-end. I mean, I’m no fan of JHB or her worldview, but I don’t think she has ever said the over eighties don’t matter has she?
She was simply posting NHS stats in her OP FFS. The ‘debate’ is in the gutter on social media.
I don't know. Why don't you ask him. He's on Twitter. Must be authoritative.
In this case, he is quite authoritative. See his Twitter bio
"Consultant Geriatrician Tameside & Glossop, Former NHS National Clinical Director|Clinical Advisor Manchester & London|Leader"
Dismissing an opinion, just because it is worrying, or "on Twitter", is daft
He's not an immunological scientist, he's a doctor of old people. I don't know how qualified that makes him, more than me or you, but maybe not more than the very high grade immunology scientists the government has advising it.
So blood from 26 people were tested, blood from all showed sufficient antibodies to kill main strain, blood from 7 showed insufficient to beat the Saffer strain.
Now besides the fact it's a lab test and not peer reviewed and a small sample ...
... That shows 100% success against the main variant. ... And 19/26 = 73% success against the Saffer strain.
If your vaccine is 73% successful, let alone 100% successful, then dosing twice as many people is absolutely the right strategy!
I hope you are right.
It seems that HMG were correct to delay AZ. But Pfizer? I guess we will find out for sure quite soon, on all counts.
AZ has NOT been delayed - 12 weeks was the best indication out of the trial data. Have to scotch this myth every time it rears it head.
Is that true? I stand corrected. A lot of confusing info around
Given some are delibately seeking to confuse it, that's not a surprise.
The other thing is that whilst we are in lockdown and cases are decreasing, the dodgy mutation isn't likely to spread very far.
It might become a problem if it transmits better and we unlock to such a point that R=1 or thereabouts.
That would be a perfect scenario for creating more mutants given the important SA mutation seems to be occurring spontaneously in lots of places.
The virus wants to live!
Another vaccine will be needed sooner rather than later.
I wouldn't anthromorphise the virus. It is not sentient..
Although that still leaves it smarter than Ursula von der Leyen.
I think it necessary to distinguish between intelligence (which she certainly has) and judgement.
I know lots of intelligent people who make poor decisions. I see them every day in clinic.
And the attributes to make good decisions in a crisis (get it right enough for now, NOW) and in normal times (take more time to get it really right) are different.
Hence different leadership styles doing well in blitzkrieg, wars of attrition and peacetime. Has any individual really mastered even two of those three?
I don't know. Why don't you ask him. He's on Twitter. Must be authoritative.
In this case, he is quite authoritative. See his Twitter bio
"Consultant Geriatrician Tameside & Glossop, Former NHS National Clinical Director|Clinical Advisor Manchester & London|Leader"
Dismissing an opinion, just because it is worrying, or "on Twitter", is daft
Oh really? Because nobody on Twitter could be pushing an agenda if they used to formerly have a role with the NHS? Are you seriously that naïve?
Especially when what's being claimed, eg outbreaks within the 21 days, is what we should be expected. Outbreaks after 21 days would be concerning but there isn't much time to see that yet and frankly I wouldn't trust anyone previously pushing an agenda before it started.
So blood from 26 people were tested, blood from all showed sufficient antibodies to kill main strain, blood from 7 showed insufficient to beat the Saffer strain.
Now besides the fact it's a lab test and not peer reviewed and a small sample ...
... That shows 100% success against the main variant. ... And 19/26 = 73% success against the Saffer strain.
If your vaccine is 73% successful, let alone 100% successful, then dosing twice as many people is absolutely the right strategy!
I hope you are right.
It seems that HMG were correct to delay AZ. But Pfizer? I guess we will find out for sure quite soon, on all counts.
AZ has NOT been delayed - 12 weeks was the best indication out of the trial data. Have to scotch this myth every time it rears it head.
Is that true? I stand corrected. A lot of confusing info around
Given some are delibately seeking to confuse it, that's not a surprise.
The other thing is that whilst we are in lockdown and cases are decreasing, the dodgy mutation isn't likely to spread very far.
It might become a problem if it transmits better and we unlock to such a point that R=1 or thereabouts.
That would be a perfect scenario for creating more mutants given the important SA mutation seems to be occurring spontaneously in lots of places.
The virus wants to live!
Another vaccine will be needed sooner rather than later.
I wouldn't anthromorphise the virus. It is not sentient.
It does seem to be exhibiting the phenomenon of convergent evolution.
Which would suggest that there are few other ecological niches for the virus to fill. Possibly it has no other direction to go.
I wonder if humans are sentient half the time so I wouldn't worry about the anthropomorphism...
It is an interesting question though. Is there a "local maximum" of transmission after which spike protein mutation essentially stops or is there an endless stream of mutations which follow one after another?
We are definitely forcing evolution at the moment so might find out sooner rather than later.
The mutation that has developed in SA, Brazil and now seemingly in the UK strains binds it more tightly to the ACE receptor, to gain access to the host cell. Hence more infectious. This convergent pattern suggests that other mutations are probably not so helpful at gaining entry.
It's really desperate stuff coming out of the EU. Beyond unacceptable.
There appear to be no sane voices left over there able to say "Serioulsy guys - you are looking profoundly foolish. Each utterance is proving so counter-productive. STFU."
I know you are a professional environmentalist. Has your second paragraph been recycled? It could easily have been written about any number of PB Brexiteers towards the end of last year. If so, good work!
I don't know. Why don't you ask him. He's on Twitter. Must be authoritative.
In this case, he is quite authoritative. See his Twitter bio
"Consultant Geriatrician Tameside & Glossop, Former NHS National Clinical Director|Clinical Advisor Manchester & London|Leader"
Dismissing an opinion, just because it is worrying, or "on Twitter", is daft
He's not an immunological scientist, he's a doctor of old people. I don't know how qualified that makes him, more than me or you, but maybe not more than the very high grade immunology scientists the government has advising it.
Being a "doctor of old people" makes him quite an authority on whether deaths of old people (in this case in care homes) are increasing, perhaps to a worrying degree
As I have already said, I am not immediately believing everything he says, but given the other voices adding support to his opinion, it is worth admitting the POSSIBILITY that he is right
It's really desperate stuff coming out of the EU. Beyond unacceptable.
There appear to be no sane voices left over there able to say "Serioulsy guys - you are looking profoundly foolish. Each utterance is proving so counter-productive. STFU."
I know you are a professional environmentalist. Has your second paragraph been recycled? It could easily have been written about any number of PB Brexiteers towards the end of last year. If so, good work!
I think it quite a sensible idea if all politicians everywhere, refer all questions about the efficacy of vaccines etc to national level scientific experts.
I don't know. Why don't you ask him. He's on Twitter. Must be authoritative.
In this case, he is quite authoritative. See his Twitter bio
"Consultant Geriatrician Tameside & Glossop, Former NHS National Clinical Director|Clinical Advisor Manchester & London|Leader"
Dismissing an opinion, just because it is worrying, or "on Twitter", is daft
Oh really? Because nobody on Twitter could be pushing an agenda if they used to formerly have a role with the NHS? Are you seriously that naïve?
Especially when what's being claimed, eg outbreaks within the 21 days, is what we should be expected. Outbreaks after 21 days would be concerning but there isn't much time to see that yet and frankly I wouldn't trust anyone previously pushing an agenda before it started.
What are you getting your knickers in a twist for? ‘They would have died anyway’ was your line wasn’t it?
I don't know. Why don't you ask him. He's on Twitter. Must be authoritative.
In this case, he is quite authoritative. See his Twitter bio
"Consultant Geriatrician Tameside & Glossop, Former NHS National Clinical Director|Clinical Advisor Manchester & London|Leader"
Dismissing an opinion, just because it is worrying, or "on Twitter", is daft
Some care home workers have declined to be jabbed.
Isn't the vaccine meant to prevent serious infection, rather than any infection?
The whole point is that people do not pass away or need to be hospitalised.
I'd love some more details on whether these outbreaks are in care homes that have had 100% of the staff jabbed - or conversely, if a material number have refused it.
I don't know. Why don't you ask him. He's on Twitter. Must be authoritative.
In this case, he is quite authoritative. See his Twitter bio
"Consultant Geriatrician Tameside & Glossop, Former NHS National Clinical Director|Clinical Advisor Manchester & London|Leader"
Dismissing an opinion, just because it is worrying, or "on Twitter", is daft
He's not an immunological scientist, he's a doctor of old people. I don't know how qualified that makes him, more than me or you, but maybe not more than the very high grade immunology scientists the government has advising it.
Being a "doctor of old people" makes him quite an authority on whether deaths of old people (in this case in care homes) are increasing, perhaps to a worrying degree
As I have already said, I am not immediately believing everything he says, but given the other voices adding support to his opinion, it is worth admitting the POSSIBILITY that he is right
I do not see any mention of deaths in that article, or even hospitalisations.
These are the keys, surely. Vaccines don;t make you bullet proof.
Comments
Just looked at the Met forecast. Glad I'm not going anywhere soon.
https://www.overlawyered.com/2014/08/wrongfully-arrested-man-charged-getting-blood-cops-uniforms/
I remember hearing about this story - supposedly no video footage existed, even though the cells were equipped with cameras. Weird.
https://twitter.com/runnermandoc/status/1356497662325981184?s=20
So blood from 26 people were tested, blood from all showed sufficient antibodies to kill main strain, blood from 7 showed insufficient to beat the Saffer strain.
Now besides the fact it's a lab test and not peer reviewed and a small sample ...
... That shows 100% success against the main variant.
... And 19/26 = 73% success against the Saffer strain.
If your vaccine is 73% successful, let alone 100% successful, then dosing twice as many people is absolutely the right strategy!
I am not saying he is BS, but we know none of these vaccines are 100%, definitely not within 3 weeks. People saying yeah we got an outbreak here, do we know how many have been vaccinated, how long ago they were, with what vaccine.
One thing I have been concerned about is the reports of unwillingness of staff to get jabbed. It would be good to have proper figures on this.
It seems that HMG were correct to delay AZ. But Pfizer? I guess we will find out for sure quite soon, on all counts.
The latest evidence (linked below) provides further evidence that AZN 2nd dose should be left longer than 3 weeks.
Bit concerned a doctor doesn't know this...unless he does and he is making a political point.
The very first AZN dose was 29 days ago. Anyone claiming they've had multiple outbreaks more than 21 days after vaccination ... I'd take with a major pinch of salt. The timeline is very tight for that to be even possible.
If this guy was some random nutter, I'd dismiss him, but he is:
"Consultant Geriatrician Tameside & Glossop, Former NHS National Clinical Director|Clinical Advisor Manchester & London|Leader/occasional follower| Views my own"
with 5000 followers, many of them also medical professionals. He is popular with FBPE types as well, so I guess it is possible he is seeking out bad news subconsciously....
It is quite possible that he is right, and delaying Pfizer has endangered some old people, and yet, at the same time, the government was/is ALSO right, given that - at the time the decision to delay was made - the UK was headed for meltdown. The risk was worth it overall.
https://twitter.com/duncanrobinson/status/1356668396415385605
We will unfortunately get people who still die from COVID despite having the Pfizer jab or the AZN jab etc.
I know government's find it hard, but it's not as though admitting some problems is impossible.
This could be a huge break for the UK, absolutely massive. The Ox-AZ vaccine really could be the best thing that has ever come out of this country.
https://twitter.com/BBCRosAtkins/status/1356354283202088960
It might become a problem if it transmits better and we unlock to such a point that R=1 or thereabouts.
That would be a perfect scenario for creating more mutants given the important SA mutation seems to be occurring spontaneously in lots of places.
The virus wants to live!
Another vaccine will be needed sooner rather than later.
"Geoff Butcher, who runs a group of six care homes in the Midlands, said it had completed inoculation of all its residents over a week ago. However, in one of its homes more than half the residents had recently tested positive for the virus in an outbreak that had started three weeks after receiving the Pfizer vaccine."
So care homes ARE getting Pfizer
Also:
"Martin Green, chief executive of Care England, which represents care home operators, praised the speed and effectiveness of the rollout. But he added that a second dose within a shorter timescale “might help protect those most at risk of severe disease and mortality and also alleviate the burden upon the NHS by preventing hospitalisation”. Care England is also seeking assurances that there will be adequate supplies of the second dose."
"Deaths in care homes with Covid-19 on the death certificate have risen by about a third in England and Wales over the past week."
And here's that Vernon guy again:
"Martin Vernon, a consultant geriatrician in Greater Manchester and formerly a senior official in charge of care for older people at NHS England, said he had recently seen “a substantial outbreak” in a fully vaccinated care home that would have been due for the second dose round about now, within the 21 day interval. “Unfortunately some of those people are now very poorly,” he added.
"Prof Vernon likened the choice to go against the three week dosing interval tested by Pfizer during clinical trials, to the decision, about a year ago, to move people out of hospital and into care homes without testing them for the
disease, helping to spread the virus.
“We are knowingly being instructed to expose one of the most vulnerable groups a second time around to a level of risk that we cannot easily quantify but can anticipate to be higher than if we had followed the available scientific evidence,” Prof Vernon said."
https://www.ft.com/content/36fc3231-19bf-4c31-8e41-d7866f3c6c27
Let's hope Ursula VDL hasn't got something accidentally right
I do wonder, though, whether there might be a problem of the vaccination teams bringing infection in to the homes?
It does sound as if what is being reported is outbreaks a week or two after vaccination. So more likely to be caught at the time of vaccination than anything else.
We should have data in a months time as to how effective single dose is the real world. 🤞
The company did say we have no evidence this delay will work.
https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/06/john-p-moore-how-do-you-take-your-vaccine-one-lump-or-two/
https://twitter.com/jimmfelton/status/1356646442769776644?s=21
But it is too early to say.
That being said, surely now is the moment to use our existing Pfizer stock for second jabs and switch to AZ full time, in case those nutters at the Commission actually do seize Pfizer’s supply as they’re threatening to.
It does seem to be exhibiting the phenomenon of convergent evolution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergent_evolution
Which would suggest that there are few other ecological niches for the virus to fill. Possibly it has no other direction to go.
And then it becomes - as it always is - a question of how best to ratio a scarce resource.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/netherlands/
Spain is now seeing the inevitable surge in deaths: 724 today (and another 30,000 cases). The worst day of their 2nd wave
It is bad in Iberia
If they would have been due for the second dose round about now, they were not due it yet.
If the breakout happened "within" the 21 days then they were not due it yet.
Nothing that occurs "within" the 21 day window is affected by the decision to delay the second dose.
However, the protection doesn't show up until around two weeks after the jab:
https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/12/10/1013914/pfizer-biontech-vaccine-chart-covid-19/
And of course anything before 21 days is not relevant to the UK's decision to delay the second dose from 21 days to 12 weeks.
he says
(Do I need to add the bits about Bingham for PM, vdL for something less challenging?)
https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1356673032371249152?s=20
I know lots of intelligent people who make poor decisions. I see them every day in clinic.
There appear to be no sane voices left over there able to say "Serioulsy guys - you are looking profoundly foolish. Each utterance is proving so counter-productive. STFU."
It is an interesting question though. Is there a "local maximum" of transmission after which spike protein mutation essentially stops or is there an endless stream of mutations which follow one after another?
We are definitely forcing evolution at the moment so might find out sooner rather than later.
Given that the logistics of the Pfizer vaccine aren't the easiest to set up, my first thought would be whether there's any possibility that the procedure for getting the vaccine to the residents fell somewhat short.
"Consultant Geriatrician Tameside & Glossop, Former NHS National Clinical Director|Clinical Advisor Manchester & London|Leader"
Dismissing an opinion, just because it is worrying, or "on Twitter", is daft
We need more data.
Isn't the vaccine meant to prevent serious infection, rather than any infection?
The whole point is that people do not pass away or need to be hospitalised.
For there to be problems with delaying the second dose then infection needs to take place five weeks after the first dose and two weeks after when a second dose could have been given.
She was simply posting NHS stats in her OP FFS. The ‘debate’ is in the gutter on social media.
Hence different leadership styles doing well in blitzkrieg, wars of attrition and peacetime. Has any individual really mastered even two of those three?
Especially when what's being claimed, eg outbreaks within the 21 days, is what we should be expected. Outbreaks after 21 days would be concerning but there isn't much time to see that yet and frankly I wouldn't trust anyone previously pushing an agenda before it started.
As I have already said, I am not immediately believing everything he says, but given the other voices adding support to his opinion, it is worth admitting the POSSIBILITY that he is right
These are the keys, surely. Vaccines don;t make you bullet proof.