|
|
Post by mekon on Dec 3, 2020 14:00:22 GMT
Haven't the drug companies got complete immunity from legal action on this?
|
|
|
|
Post by elnoodle the reasonable on Dec 3, 2020 14:22:50 GMT
Does anyone know what the implication is of the vaccine not beiong stored / handled according to the requirements (i.e. temperature)? I personally think that this is where the problems lie, best case is that the vaccine simply doesn't work because it has "defrosted" at some point in the supply chain, so you might have batches of people thinking they are vaccinated when actually they are not. Worst case is that it turns you into a purple minion or something... I'm kind of hoping that the Pfizer produced one will only be used in the first instances and that by the time my turn rolls round Spain will have switched to the later developed, but easier to produce and administer versions. There seems to be a few unknowns such as long term side effects, period of protection before a booster is required and will it actually eventually prevent spread or just stop you getting ill? Also, should a mutated version of the virus emerge, or even a whole new virus, we could be back to square one. I guess we just wait and see but one thing is absolutely certain, there's a fucking big tax bill coming and it won't be getting paid by the super-rich. |
|
|
|
Post by Diego the toe clipper on Dec 3, 2020 14:58:05 GMT
I have read that the Pfizer vaccine does not claim to prevent or limit the infection, just stops the infected from suffering the symptoms.
The Oxford version does tentatively claim that it might prevent infection by a vaccinated person.
On a side note, a prominent doctor in Spain went on TV last week and said that we were all being lied to and that the official governemnt positions are optimistic for political-economic reasons.
He believes that the vaccines will not be rolled out quick enough nor be effective enough to allow us to return to normal any time soon. When asked what that meant for the day to day life and mask wearing, he said that he expected masks to be compulsory in public spaces and restrictions on mobility / gatherings to last until at least end of 2021.
|
|
|
|
Post by philthewindsurfer on Dec 3, 2020 16:09:19 GMT
Does anyone know what the implication is of the vaccine not beiong stored / handled according to the requirements (i.e. temperature)? I personally think that this is where the problems lie, best case is that the vaccine simply doesn't work because it has "defrosted" at some point in the supply chain, so you might have batches of people thinking they are vaccinated when actually they are not. Worst case is that it turns you into a purple minion or something... I'm kind of hoping that the Pfizer produced one will only be used in the first instances and that by the time my turn rolls round Spain will have switched to the later developed, but easier to produce and administer versions. No idea about what happens to it if it isnt stored correctly. No doubt that will be published in the full report and you would hope it would just be it isn't as effective. Has it been tested when administered when out of date/condition? The Oxford one costs £3 a shot and can be stored in a normal fridge, the Pfizer £15 and needs -70c storage. I think the rumours about the Oxford vaccine proving to be more effective if 1/2 a dose was given initially are true. www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55086927Some volunteers were given shots half the planned strength, in error. Yet that "wrong" dose turned out to be a winner.How the fuck in a clinical trial of a vaccine do you give the wrong dose in error? Sounds like the manufacture of the vaccine went wrong rather than the dose in the jab being the wrong amount. Their sales pitch is they have been developing vaccines for many years and its safe technology. About 3,000 participants were given the half dose and then a full dose four weeks later, and this regime appeared to provide the most protection or efficacy in the trial - around 90%.
In the larger group of nearly 9,000 volunteers, who were given two full doses also four weeks apart, efficacy was 62%.
AstraZeneca reported these percentages and also said that its vaccine was, on average, 70% effective at preventing Covid-19 illness. The figures left some experts scratching their head.
Prof David Salisbury, immunisation expert and associate fellow of the global health program at the Chatham House think tank, said: "You've taken two studies for which different doses were used and come up with a composite that doesn't represent either of the doses. I think many people are having trouble with that.″Not really. 90% of 3,000 is 2,700 62% of 9,000 is 5,580 Total number in test = 3,000 + 9,000 = 12,000 Total number of people who didn't develop CV19 = 2,700 + 5,580 = 8280. 8280/12000 = 0.69 or 69% Anyway, whats with the 'about' and 'nearly'? The thing is, did they actually expose these people to CV19 on purpose during the trial, or did they just let them go about their normal life? These news articles never tell you how many of the people who received the placebo jab went on to catch CV19. One would assume that they factor this into the % efficiency of these drugs. You need that number as a control as some (or most) people wouldn't be exposed to CV19 in their daily life. |
|
|
|
Post by philthewindsurfer on Dec 3, 2020 16:21:49 GMT
On a side note, a prominent doctor in Spain went on TV last week and said that we were all being lied to and that the official governemnt positions are optimistic for political-economic reasons. I actually watched a bit of BJs press briefing. The medical officer who appeared alongside BJ said he didnt think we would ever get rid of CV19, it would return year after year like normal flu. I got the impression BJ wasn't too happy with him saying that! Sort of put a downer on his briefing. |
|
|
|
Post by elnoodle the reasonable on Dec 3, 2020 16:47:58 GMT
I'm not expecting to return to the office in the same way as before. I expect working from home to be the default model now, even post-vaccine. Maybe going in once a week for team meetings or something.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eddie The Bastard on Dec 3, 2020 18:24:03 GMT
On a side note, a prominent doctor in Spain went on TV last week and said that we were all being lied to and that the official governemnt positions are optimistic for political-economic reasons. I actually watched a bit of BJs press briefing. The medical officer who appeared alongside BJ said he didnt think we would ever get rid of CV19, it would return year after year like normal flu. I got the impression BJ wasn't too happy with him saying that! Sort of put a downer on his briefing. He doesn't like non uplifting stuff unless he can squeeze in some sort of WWII bollocks. Scientists combing the night sky with searchlights looking for Bosch virus bombers. The silly cunt. I almost find myself hoping it is a repeat of the Asiatic / Russian 'flu that came back for a few years before fizzling out - at least there was closure then. Obviously, I hope COVID-19 naffs off pronto, but as said, there are too many gaps in the knowledge despite the advances and I fear the end is not quite as in sight as it appears. |
|
|
|
Post by mekon on Dec 3, 2020 20:52:07 GMT
The Chinese probably have another one up their sleeves anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by beefus on Dec 4, 2020 7:55:12 GMT
On a side note, a prominent doctor in Spain went on TV last week and said that we were all being lied to and that the official governemnt positions are optimistic for political-economic reasons. I actually watched a bit of BJs press briefing. The medical officer who appeared alongside BJ said he didnt think we would ever get rid of CV19, it would return year after year like normal flu. I got the impression BJ wasn't too happy with him saying that! Sort of put a downer on his briefing. I think the answer to the mutation question is "yes", "probably", "maybe".... www.sciencefocus.com/news/covid-19-is-the-virus-mutating/Whatever happens, we can't keep imposing lockdowns of varying degrees every time there is a perceived spike in infections/death, it's cost nearly 400 billion so far apparently...not even Ritchy Sunak can afford to pay that off, his father in law might be able to though ;-) |
|
|
|
Post by beefus on Dec 4, 2020 8:07:41 GMT
I actually watched a bit of BJs press briefing. The medical officer who appeared alongside BJ said he didnt think we would ever get rid of CV19, it would return year after year like normal flu. I got the impression BJ wasn't too happy with him saying that! Sort of put a downer on his briefing. I think the answer to the mutation question is "yes", "probably", "maybe".... www.sciencefocus.com/news/covid-19-is-the-virus-mutating/Whatever happens, we can't keep imposing lockdowns of varying degrees every time there is a perceived spike in infections/death, it's cost nearly 400 billion so far apparently...not even Ritchy Sunak can afford to pay that off, his father in law might be able to though ;-) Are we heading into I Am Legend territory, where we all end up living in darkness and mutating into cannibalistic night creatures with only one *man standing?.... *Woman, Non-Binary, Gender Neutral, Cisgender options also available. |
|
|
|
Post by mekon on Dec 4, 2020 8:49:56 GMT
What a waste of fucking money for such a low mortality rate in the general population. Imagine if they could cure cancer this quickly.
We are constantly being asked to nickel and dime donate to cancer research which kills close to 1/3 of us and yet this shit which finishes off people past their life expectancy gets £400bn. WHAT THE FUCK. Cancer may not be contagious but if your contagious disease mostly does fuck all to the majority of people then we need to look at things deeper.
What was the big risk? Some old people would die? They always die. The NHS wouldn't cope. The NHS hasn't coped for years anyway. The greater good in the end would have been to let it run and if you died you died. Old those terminally ill in hospital would die (As they did), a lot of the resources being used towards the end of life people would be freed up. Te only cunts out of pocket would be nursing home bastards. Nobody would have lost their job, nobody would be desperately ordering a scotch egg with their pint and all those MP cunts mates would't have got rich. Imagine all the released wealth from boomers going back into something other than Skodas and garden centres.
You can go on about gammons etc but most of the suggestions by average Joe would have been better than what this government came up with.
Now we have a phony 'vaccine' that's not quite as good as it first seemed and may even not stop you carrying the virus, just not have symptoms. And we'll buy the most expensive on as per the usual government spending rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by spentcase on Dec 4, 2020 9:11:37 GMT
Having been on the receiving end of government lies, deceit and propaganda, I have to say that I wouldn't take the vaccine purely because, based on empirical evidence, I don't believe a word that the government says.
I would, however, fight every single member of the cabinet in a televised tournament to decide the righteous victor as deemed by the will of the Almighty.
|
|
|
|
Post by philthewindsurfer on Dec 4, 2020 10:35:52 GMT
Haven't the drug companies got complete immunity from legal action on this? Looks that way. The Independent says The Department of Health and Social Care has confirmed the company has been given an indemnity protecting it from legal action as a result of any problems with the vaccine.
Ministers have also changed the law in recent weeks to give new protections to companies such as Pfizer, giving them immunity from being sued by patients in the event of any complications.Sort of implies that this was done as a one off. They haven't changed the law, it exists already. Maybe they have added specifics, although the legislation.gov.uk website doesnt reflect that. www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-pfizer-vaccine-legal-indemnity-safety-ministers-b1765124.htmlFullfact says its currently that way under EU law, However, this doesn’t apply when the sale or supply of a medicinal product is temporarily authorised in response to “pathogenic agents” such as the virus which causes Covid-19. So companies are protected if they make a vaccine in response to something like CV19. fullfact.org/health/unlicensed-vaccine-manufacturers-are-immune-some-not-all-civil-liability/Link to the UK law for this as in the article here www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2012/1916/regulation/174 |
|
|
|
Post by philthewindsurfer on Dec 4, 2020 10:42:20 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by philthewindsurfer on Dec 4, 2020 10:50:25 GMT
Having been on the receiving end of government lies, deceit and propaganda, I have to say that I wouldn't take the vaccine purely because, based on empirical evidence, I don't believe a word that the government says. I would, however, fight every single member of the cabinet in a televised tournament to decide the righteous victor as deemed by the will of the Almighty. Careful. They would probably promote and draft in Mark Francois as a ringer , he was in the TA don't you know. |
|
