Jump to content
filbertway

Coronavirus Thread

Recommended Posts

I quite like the idea that those in the new tier 3 will get the same mass testing as Liverpool to get tier 3 regions back down to tier 2 as quickly as possible. The rates seems to have fallen dramatically in Liverpool as a result of mass testing picking up a host of asymptomatic cases that may never have been captured.

Edited by Nalis
Link to post
Share on other sites

So from what I can gather, the Oxford vaccine has 62% efficacy when two full doses are administered.

The talk of 90% is based on the half then full dose approach, which by itself has a very small comparative sample.

Surely this will need to be researched further and more trials carried out. I would imagine this would cause a delay for all those extra trials to be administered?

 

I (perhaps naively) couldn’t help but feel disappointed waking up to this news, even considering the practical advantages of this specific vaccine. Presumably it also means those not wanting to accept the vaccine can do even more damage in the quest for herd immunity, what with the vaccine working on less people?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Nalis said:

I quite like the idea that those in the new tier 3 will get the same mass testing as Liverpool to get tier 3 regions back down to tier 2 as quickly as possible. The rates seems to have fallen dramatically in Liverpool as a result of mass testing picking up a host of asymptomatic cases that may never have been captured.

We were the first city to stay in a lockdown, during this lockdown there have actually been more cases, were other places have fallen it’s still on the up here, I have absolutely no faith with the people of Leicester!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kingleicester said:

We were the first city to stay in a lockdown, during this lockdown there have actually been more cases, were other places have fallen it’s still on the up here, I have absolutely no faith with the people of Leicester!

I dont live in Leicester so I'm not as qualified to comment but the mentality of people might change if they know they have it and need to self isolate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Nuneatonfox in Manchester said:

So from what I can gather, the Oxford vaccine has 62% efficacy when two full doses are administered.

The talk of 90% is based on the half then full dose approach, which by itself has a very small comparative sample.

Surely this will need to be researched further and more trials carried out. I would imagine this would cause a delay for all those extra trials to be administered?

 

I (perhaps naively) couldn’t help but feel disappointed waking up to this news, even considering the practical advantages of this specific vaccine. Presumably it also means those not wanting to accept the vaccine can do even more damage in the quest for herd immunity, what with the vaccine working on less people?

I think they’ll need to review whether there are any extra circumstances around why the half-then-full group had fewer cases. And, if they find no particular differences in the behaviour and circumstances of this group compared to the double-full group, they’ll need to study the stats with proper confidence bands to see whether they’re within natural variation. It is possible that they’re onto something here, or possibly not. Best to wait for peer-review to properly pull everything apart. One good thing I’d suggest is that (I believe) they should be able to use the results from both groups to ascertain safety, which is a massive hurdle in itself. And they can always potentially go with half-then-full rollout as standard anyway. 70% effectiveness is still positive.

 

As for whether it’ll require more people to take it up, that could easily end up being a big battle itself in the months to come. I hope people from across the political spectrum and society come together in that time to help with this because the message needs to reach everyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, RowlattsFox said:

The problem with mass testing is getting people to get tested without having symptoms. Especially with Christmas around the corner people would probably rather not risk getting tested and having to isolate. Especially if you can't afford to not work. 

 

Plus most will be suffering daily hangovers where they don't know their harris from their elbow. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I’d be interested to know is the severity of the disease for people who did get Covid. ie, was there a lower % death or hospitalisation rate for the people who contracted it despite having the vaccine, or did that rate stay the same regardless. It may be that a vaccine could offer deeper protection than just a first line of defence, in which case I doubt people would mind an initial 70% rate.
 

But I might be barking up completely the wrong tree with that of course.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dunge said:

One thing I’d be interested to know is the severity of the disease for people who did get Covid. ie, was there a lower % death or hospitalisation rate for the people who contracted it despite having the vaccine, or did that rate stay the same regardless. It may be that a vaccine could offer deeper protection than just a first line of defence, in which case I doubt people would mind an initial 70% rate.
 

But I might be barking up completely the wrong tree with that of course.

I don't think you are barking up the wrong tree at all! My understanding of the aim of the oxford vaccine was to stop it progressing to the lungs which is obviously where the problems come in. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/is-the-oxford-vaccine-less-good-than-others-not-necessarily-p9ffksnx5

 

Quote
When it comes to scientific glory, timing is everything. Three weeks ago Oxford’s announcement would have been the biggest story in the world: a vaccine developed in record time with significantly higher efficacy than expected.
Today, it is simply the third such vaccine and, on headline results at least, less good than the competition.
What we know from the data is that Oxford’s vaccine appears to prevent 70 per cent of symptomatic infections, compared with 95 per cent for the two vaccines already announced.
What we have hints of is that it may be even better if you use half for the first dose. Then, the scientists claim, it is perhaps 90 per cent effective.
There are theoretical reasons why this apparently counterintuitive finding might be correct. The immune system is immensely complex and lower initial doses could prime it more effectively. It is possible that the half dose may better mimic what happens in a real infection.
However, there are also statistical reasons to be sceptical. Today’s findings are based on an analysis of 131 infections. The analysis that produced the 90 per cent figure is based on a subset of that. Once you start slicing the data, you are making decisions on the basis of very few cases — and confidence is low. Yesterday, the Oxford team would not say how many cases they had in this group.
Does it matter? Simon Clarke, of the University of Reading, thinks that our obsession with these efficacy figures — treating the trials as if they were the vaccines’ exam results — is silly.
“There’s less virus swishing around in the population, which means far fewer infections than normal,” he said. “The numbers can’t possibly be reflective of what would happen under ‘wild’ conditions.”
Numbers like this are not a fixed property of the vaccine but the function of our behaviour. All these trials happened in a very strange world: a world of mask-wearers and elbow bumps. Those who did get infected probably did so in abnormal ways, taking in fewer viral particles than they would in a non-socially distanced time.
“These vaccines clearly work but I’m dismayed with the obsession over percentage efficacy,” Dr Clarke said.
The truth is, the value of a vaccine is not a single efficacy number. It is many efficacy numbers in many age and risk groups. It is also many other numbers we don’t yet know, such as the extent to which it stops transmission.
Some of the most important numbers have nothing to do with its effect in the body at all. For instance, 2-8C versus -80C: the refrigeration requirements of this vaccine compared with Pfizer’s. And three billion: the global supply planned for 2021.
In science there is no reward for second place. But this isn’t science; this is public health, and we need every vaccine we can get. The world is very far from being able to pick and choose.
This is why, in terms of its effect on Covid-19, today’s announcement is just as important now as it would have been three weeks ago.
The light at the end of the tunnel is getting a lot brighter. Today is a very good day.

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-winter-plan

 

Link to the winter plan document if anyone is interested. Decent breakdown of what restrictions are in each tier, basically most things are open again apart from hospitality unless you can takeaway. I'd be surprised if many areas are tier 1.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, RowlattsFox said:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-winter-plan

 

Link to the winter plan document if anyone is interested. Decent breakdown of what restrictions are in each tier, basically most things are open again apart from hospitality unless you can takeaway. I'd be surprised if many areas are tier 1.  

I#d be surprised if many areas are in tier two as well.  What's the difference between lockdown and the new tier three?  Not a lot.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

I#d be surprised if many areas are in tier two as well.  What's the difference between lockdown and the new tier three?  Not a lot.  

Sports, gyms and shops are open even in tier 3. Not sure how you can want people to stay at home if all them are open. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Dunge said:

One thing I’d be interested to know is the severity of the disease for people who did get Covid. ie, was there a lower % death or hospitalisation rate for the people who contracted it despite having the vaccine, or did that rate stay the same regardless. It may be that a vaccine could offer deeper protection than just a first line of defence, in which case I doubt people would mind an initial 70% rate.
 

But I might be barking up completely the wrong tree with that of course.

The numbers are too small  to detect that yet  ( in all these trials).  The two Oxford trials total 23k and of that half received the placebo.  130 odd caught covid19, the majority of those were with the placebo.
 

No one with the vaccine was hospitalized but there would only have been about 30 positive cases on the vaccine  side.

Edited by Stivo
Correct figure
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, String fellow said:

I have sympathy for the 'guinea pigs' who were given the placebo and then caught the virus. Presumably, everyone knew the situation before volunteering, but even so, I'd have been very miffed if it had happened to me.  

But as you say....you knew that signing up for it. You can't really be miffed when you know you're getting one or the other lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nalis said:

I quite like the idea that those in the new tier 3 will get the same mass testing as Liverpool to get tier 3 regions back down to tier 2 as quickly as possible. The rates seems to have fallen dramatically in Liverpool as a result of mass testing picking up a host of asymptomatic cases that may never have been captured.

Please don't mention that word. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

The "two households" rule has been a bit of a bugbear all along with the "bubble" rules.  It means that if Mr Smith and Miss Jones live together and both have elderly parents, then one set of elderly parents can be treated with all care and attention while the other elderly parents must be totally shunned.

 

Well in that case,  an exception can be made for care and support needs if both sets of parents are vulnerable and need care.  If one set of parents are active and mentally fit then they may be able to understand the circumstances.   There are alternatives of course-  other family members,  care system (I recognise most of them are quite rubbish to be fair)  and so on.    I think your choices of words are tad dramatic :) 

 

However with all of that said,   there are a set of faults with every options-  none of them are perfect at all.    I also think rigid compliance to the rules is not always neccesary-  if your example have Mr Smith and Miss Jones as being only child with no alternative support etc then I would not really blame them mixing together for Chritsmas-  I am sure all of them can minmise their community activities in meanwhile to reduce the risk of transmission much as they can.    I just hope the government would provide a reasonable template for people to work from with understandable deviations if needed but I would not hold my breath.

Edited by The Blur
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, String fellow said:

I have sympathy for the 'guinea pigs' who were given the placebo and then caught the virus. Presumably, everyone knew the situation before volunteering, but even so, I'd have been very miffed if it had happened to me.  

Do you gamble on sports?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...