Corona Virus main thread

[CANARYKING 634]

1 hour ago, Aggy said:

Didn’t listen to the radio but the simple fact is that won’t happen - it’s not a decision for scientists but for politicians. If hospitals aren’t at risk of being overwhelmed, nobody will stand for ongoing lockdowns and no government is going to continue to ban large social events like concerts, football matches etc if there is no genuine and immediate risk of hospitals being overwhelmed. If hospitals continue to be at risk of being overwhelmed even after everyone has been vaccinated (which seems unlikely) then there will still come a point when people will have enough and politicians will bow to pressure as well. 

Sorry, can’t see it, in a few months time whatever Boris says people will go the other way

[Rock The Boat 1,324]

1 hour ago, Aggy said:

Didn’t listen to the radio but the simple fact is that won’t happen - it’s not a decision for scientists but for politicians. If hospitals aren’t at risk of being overwhelmed, nobody will stand for ongoing lockdowns and no government is going to continue to ban large social events like concerts, football matches etc if there is no genuine and immediate risk of hospitals being overwhelmed. If hospitals continue to be at risk of being overwhelmed even after everyone has been vaccinated (which seems unlikely) then there will still come a point when people will have enough and politicians will bow to pressure as well. 

Come the summer people will vote with their feet, literally. Once the warm weather arrives no government edict will be able to hold back the populace, I suspect. 

[Well b back 3,186]

10 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

Does it matter if it works realistically?

who’s putting a Russian injection in their arm? You aren’t going to be able to sell that one. Not even with a trip to Salisbury cathedral thrown in.

The Lancet paper was issued recently, safe and 94%  effective. 

[The Real Buh 3,423]

2 minutes ago, Well b back said:

The Lancet paper was issued recently, safe and 94%  effective. 

Doesn’t matter. You aren’t selling a Russian vaccine in this country lol

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

5 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

The best bit of news - and the bit that should inform strategy  - is the suppression of transmissibility.

The best way to stop the virus is not to catch it in the first place.

The suppression of transmissibility should lead to those most at risk of SPREADING the disease being vaccinated as a matter of urgency.

That may well be teenagers, students and those actively working that cant help but meet people.

I know 'Deaths' is as a strong metric for politicians (and yes Sumption's quote was taken too simply but is obviously correct)  but its not the only metric that matters.

I think this is one of the hardest decisions in the pandemic.  Do you vaccinate those at most risk of dying or the younger ones who are more likely to spread it in practice ? I can see arguments both ways. Indonesia is the only country I'm aware of that's starting with younger people ?  In the film Contagion, it's given to everyone on their birthday although the film can skirt over the fact this means it takes an entire year to get out of the pandemic - it also assumes as soon as you've had your vaccine, you are safe and can get back to normal life (courtesy of a metal bracelet attached to your wrist) which of course we now know is simply not true !

 

Personally I think it makes sense to focus on the older and more vulnerable plus obv NHS front-line staff, and we can see that we'll get through to the end of the 50+, NHS front-line and people with high-risk conditions hopefully around early April.  I think the fact that the AZ vaccine gives good protection against severe Covid is a major factor here, it would be nice if Pfizer did the same but I'm not sure if we know on that as yet ?

 

Then it's tricky where we go from there.  Fortunately this is being decided by independent experts not by our politicians.

 

I'd be interested to know how this is being decided in the US, Russia, China, I've not seen this mentioned in the news ? 

Edited February 3, 2021 by It's Character Forming
wanted to add a bit

[Yellow Fever 3,736]

58 minutes ago, It's Character Forming said:

I think this is one of the hardest decisions in the pandemic.  Do you vaccinate those at most risk of dying or the younger ones who are more likely to spread it in practice ? I can see arguments both ways. Indonesia is the only country I'm aware of that's starting with younger people ?  In the film Contagion, it's given to everyone on their birthday although the film can skirt over the fact this means it takes an entire year to get out of the pandemic - it also assumes as soon as you've had your vaccine, you are safe and can get back to normal life (courtesy of a metal bracelet attached to your wrist) which of course we now know is simply not true !

 

Personally I think it makes sense to focus on the older and more vulnerable plus obv NHS front-line staff, and we can see that we'll get through to the end of the 50+, NHS front-line and people with high-risk conditions hopefully around early April.  I think the fact that the AZ vaccine gives good protection against severe Covid is a major factor here, it would be nice if Pfizer did the same but I'm not sure if we know on that as yet ?

 

Then it's tricky where we go from there.  Fortunately this is being decided by independent experts not by our politicians.

 

I'd be interested to know how this is being decided in the US, Russia, China, I've not seen this mentioned in the news ? 

The real question behind my thoughts is HOW do the elderly get it - are they out socializing and dancing or are they generally quite cautious. Certainly those 'youngsters' < 65 are out in the real economic world meeting people.

It may well be that  significantly reducing the virus prevalence and transmissibility (breaking the chains of transmission) in the people the elderly meet may have a more but indirect effect on deaths in that group than a vaccine with say 60 to 80% efficacy at their age and with the new variants. Needs modelling ! Of course vaccinating the working age gets the economy moving faster too.

Really as I said earlier nothing is actual simple. Just a question of priorities.

[Yellow Fever 3,736]

On the Russians - a general point. 

They have a long and proud history of scientific firsts and achievements - the most obvious one is the first satellite (Sputnik) and the first man in space. Their scientists, academics and engineers are every bit as good as ours. Where historically they used to fail was in commercializing and mass production of their technologies. In many ways they were a little more like us in the UK - limited resources so had to be clever (it drives invention) as opposed to just hurling money at it.

The Sputnik V and AZ are very similar vaccine technologies and with the right safety data and trials (which are now to hand) I would have no worries about either - indeed they are as WBB suggests now starting combined trials for even greater efficacy.

As to current Russian politics that's a different matter!

Edited February 3, 2021 by Yellow Fever

[Indy 3,283]

1 hour ago, The Real Buh said:

Does it matter if it works realistically?

who’s putting a Russian injection in their arm? You aren’t going to be able to sell that one. Not even with a trip to Salisbury cathedral thrown in.

I will, no worries, the initial start point was the same for both vaccines and end point is very similar, now the cooperative nature of humans comes forward, no need to take an anti foreign stance for the good of all people! Sputnik and the Russians are certainly capable of producing vaccines the same as anyone else. Good on them for getting it so spot on! They should be thanked not belittled.

[The Real Buh 3,423]

3 minutes ago, Indy said:

I will, no worries, the initial start point was the same for both vaccines and end point is very similar, now the cooperative nature of humans comes forward, no need to take an anti foreign stance for the good of all people! Sputnik and the Russians are certainly capable of producing vaccines the same as anyone else. Good on them for getting it so spot on! They should be thanked not belittled.

Pfff, alright mate. You go ahead and get your Russian vaccine. I’m sure there will be a long queue for one.

[Van wink 2,994]

20 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

The real question behind my thoughts is HOW do the elderly get it - are they out socializing and dancing or are they generally quite cautious. Certainly those 'youngsters' < 65 are out in the real economic world meeting people.

It may well be that  significantly reducing the virus prevalence and transmissibility (breaking the chains of transmission) in the people the elderly meet may have a more but indirect effect on deaths in that group than a vaccine with say 60 to 80% efficacy at their age and with the new variants. Needs modelling ! Of course vaccinating the working age gets the economy moving faster too.

Really as I said earlier nothing is actual simple. Just a question of priorities.

Surely the most immediate way to protect the NHS is to vaccinate those who are most likely to end up in hospital, rather than vaccinate those who are most likely to infect those who are most likely to end up in hospital, if you get my drift😁

[Well b back 3,186]

35 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

Pfff, alright mate. You go ahead and get your Russian vaccine. I’m sure there will be a long queue for one.

That’s really interesting as that should provoke a real discussion.
It will be difficult, based on perception rather than fact, but the fact is there will be an Oxford vaccine that is 95% effective as opposed to 70%, are you saying you wouldn’t trust trials administered by AstraZeneca using part of The Oxford vaccine ? Oxford think the Russian involvement will improve their efficacy to 95% is that not a good thing ?. I suspect as well Russia like India could provide huge processing plants.

 

 

[The Real Buh 3,423]

1 minute ago, Well b back said:

That’s really interesting as that should provoke a real discussion.
It will be difficult, based on perception rather than fact, but the fact is there will be an Oxford vaccine that is 95% effective as opposed to 70%, are you saying you wouldn’t trust trials administered by AstraZeneca using part of The Oxford vaccine ? Oxford think the Russian involvement will improve their efficacy to 95% is that not a good thing ?. I suspect as well Russia like India could provide huge processing plants.

 

 

Im not questioning the science! I sure it’s very robust, but how do you separate “Russian government poisons blokes tea and he nearly dies” with “honestly, stick this Russian vaccine in your arm, everything will be fine” in the general populace?

[Yellow Fever 3,736]

47 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Surely the most immediate way to protect the NHS is to vaccinate those who are most likely to end up in hospital, rather than vaccinate those who are most likely to infect those who are most likely to end up in hospital, if you get my drift😁

Yes and no. By way of real world example I note there is a push to allow relatives etc to closely visit all their care home vaccinated relatives. So let us assume that many of the visitors will be asymptotic carriers and the care home residents have say 65% efficacy. Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me. We need to get the prevalence very low before we can relax either as now by lockdown or by suppressing transmission. Somewhere there is a balance and it may not be obvious.

[Aggy 750]

1 hour ago, Van wink said:

Surely the most immediate way to protect the NHS is to vaccinate those who are most likely to end up in hospital, rather than vaccinate those who are most likely to infect those who are most likely to end up in hospital, if you get my drift😁

Way I see it there are two groups of people in hospital with it. First those in care homes/front line workers who catch it as a result of community spread and couldn’t have avoided it. Second, those who catch it by breaking the rules or being a bit careless. 

The first group obviously you vaccinate first - and their carers etc. 

The second group, isn’t everyone in the same boat? They should all be able to avoid it by staying home, whether they’re 6, 16, or 66. In which case, perhaps it does make more sense to ensure kids, teachers and even people of working age are vaccinated before retired sixty seven year olds.

Problem with that is, are those retired 67 year olds who aren’t high risk willing to make the “sacrifice” of staying at home without a vaccine so kids can be educated and parents earn money to feed them?

Plenty on here as well who made a massive thing of the supposedly life devastating long term effects of long covid on youngsters (not you I don’t think Vw to be fair). Personally I’m fairly sure this was just blown out of proportion to scare youngsters into sticking to the rules, but it is very noticeable that there hasn’t been much if any mention of it since the announcement of vaccines. 

Overall, I’d agree it makes more sense to vaccinate those more likely to be hospitalised. What would change my mind is if there was talk of “covid passes” or anything like that, whereby those retired 67 year olds were permitted “out” after a vaccination whilst kids were still not in school. 

Edited February 3, 2021 by Aggy

[Van wink 2,994]

14 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Yes and no. By way of real world example I note there is a push to allow relatives etc to closely visit all their care home vaccinated relatives. So let us assume that many of the visitors will be asymptotic carriers and the care home residents have say 65% efficacy. Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me. We need to get the prevalence very low before we can relax either as now by lockdown or by suppressing transmission. Somewhere there is a balance and it may not be obvious.

There must be a case for vaccinating the visitors to care homes and other such scenarios, absolutely agree, I thought you were raising the issue of a wholesale revision of the vaccination strategy by way of discussion.

We have always sung from the same hymn sheet regards lockdown and massive reduction in community spread before release, nothing has changed there.

[Well b back 3,186]

6 minutes ago, Van wink said:

There must be a case for vaccinating the visitors to care homes and other such scenarios, absolutely agree, I thought you were raising the issue of a wholesale revision of the vaccination strategy by way of discussion.

We have always sung from the same hymn sheet regards lockdown and massive reduction in community spread before release, nothing has changed there.

This is why being ahead of the game, doesn’t necessarily mean you are ahead of the game. With hindsight ( that hindsight using Israeli figures ) you would have got Pfizer into care homes, with a second dose 21 days later. 
Speaking to people regular at the vaccination sites there is a group I feel even more for the personal carers, I think you were in that category. In the main they are group 6 yet are constantly with a person from group 1 - 4.

Its all very difficult and any strategy can be questioned if you are in the first groups to vaccinate. Take Australia by the time they plan to start vaccinating they will be able to do it in a month 1st dose, month second dose and even know the best way to use any of the vaccines. Supply by then will not be an issue for them as there will probably be loads in the world.

[Yellow Fever 3,736]

20 minutes ago, Van wink said:

There must be a case for vaccinating the visitors to care homes and other such scenarios, absolutely agree, I thought you were raising the issue of a wholesale revision of the vaccination strategy by way of discussion.

We have always sung from the same hymn sheet regards lockdown and massive reduction in community spread before release, nothing has changed there.

Not wholesale but there for instance may be a case for vaccinating early 16+ school children (yes I know not as yet licensed) as a way to suppress transmission if the schools return. These could be strong vectors.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Sounds like there is a case for many groups to be prioritised when you digest the argument.

VW has a very good point about keeping the vulnerable out of hospital. That is one point in favour of the system used at the moment. And of course, one argument that maybe 12 weeks between jabs is too long.

Supermarket workers could probably make a good case for priority. Teachers are pushing their case. Home Carers are pleading to be advanced in the queue.

And there will be mistakes which may not prevent a death. But the current system appears to be working so I doubt there will be much change apart from the odd exception.

[Van wink 2,994]

25 minutes ago, Well b back said:

This is why being ahead of the game, doesn’t necessarily mean you are ahead of the game. With hindsight ( that hindsight using Israeli figures ) you would have got Pfizer into care homes, with a second dose 21 days later. 
Speaking to people regular at the vaccination sites there is a group I feel even more for the personal carers, I think you were in that category. In the main they are group 6 yet are constantly with a person from group 1 - 4.

Its all very difficult and any strategy can be questioned if you are in the first groups to vaccinate. Take Australia by the time they plan to start vaccinating they will be able to do it in a month 1st dose, month second dose and even know the best way to use any of the vaccines. Supply by then will not be an issue for them as there will probably be loads in the world.

A tip to anyone out there who is a personal carer, certainly around here, I am aware of two individuals who fall outside of 1 to 4 but who look after a highly vulnerable person, who have contacted their local surgery and been vaccinated. Its worth explaining your situation and seeing what they say.

[Well b back 3,186]

1 minute ago, Van wink said:

A tip to anyone out there who is a personal carer, certainly around here, I am aware of two individuals who fall outside of 1 to 4 but who look after a highly vulnerable person, who have contacted their local surgery and been vaccinated. Its worth explaining your situation and seeing what they say.

We finished at 3 yesterday and after 2:45 we had around 20 people turn up asking to be vaccinated with left overs ( there was none ), most claiming their GP had sent them. 

On the other hand we had an anti vaxer telling everyone they were going to die, we soon got rid of him lol.

[Van wink 2,994]

2 minutes ago, Well b back said:

We finished at 3 yesterday and after 2:45 we had around 20 people turn up asking to be vaccinated with left overs ( there was none ), most claiming their GP had sent them. 

On the other hand we had an anti vaxer telling everyone they were going to die, we soon got rid of him lol.

I think we are lucky having our vaccinations at our local Gp surgery, they do have a more intimate knowledge of people’s personal circumstances which seems to be an advantage.

[Yellow Fever 3,736]

34 minutes ago, Well b back said:

This is why being ahead of the game, doesn’t necessarily mean you are ahead of the game. With hindsight ( that hindsight using Israeli figures ) you would have got Pfizer into care homes, with a second dose 21 days later. 
Speaking to people regular at the vaccination sites there is a group I feel even more for the personal carers, I think you were in that category. In the main they are group 6 yet are constantly with a person from group 1 - 4.

Its all very difficult and any strategy can be questioned if you are in the first groups to vaccinate. Take Australia by the time they plan to start vaccinating they will be able to do it in a month 1st dose, month second dose and even know the best way to use any of the vaccines. Supply by then will not be an issue for them as there will probably be loads in the world.

I think the point I'm trying to make which I think most get is that our CURRENT strategy is premised on the notion that being vaccinated or not you may still be a strong carrier and indeed highly infectious to others of the disease. Hence being vaccinated or not wont suppress the disease so you may as well concentrate on the most vulnerable first!

Now however we have some data on AZ that it also suppresses the virus - you become significantly less infectious once vaccinated. That changes the balance as to how to best suppress the disease in the population (get those that mix most)  and hence protect the elderly and all.

Given that we have largely already vaccinated the most vulnerable anyway it becomes less obvious we should stick to simple age down - indeed as per Israel we could start by looking at the other end of the age spectrum as to those most likely to spread it.

[Van wink 2,994]

3 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

I think the point I'm trying to make which I think most get is that our CURRENT strategy is premised on the notion that being vaccinated or not you may still be a strong carrier and indeed highly infectious to others of the disease. Hence being vaccinated or not wont suppress the disease so you may as well concentrate on the most vulnerable first!

Now however we have some data on AZ that it also suppresses the virus - you become significantly less infectious once vaccinated. That changes the balance as to how to best suppress the disease in the population (get those that mix most)  and hence protect the elderly and all.

Given that we have largely already vaccinated the most vulnerable anyway it becomes less obvious we should stick to simple age down - indeed as per Israel we could start by looking at the other end of the age spectrum as to those most likely to spread it.

The joint committee may well have a look at things, they certainly should regularly review as information changes, we are learning more and more each day.

[CANARYKING 634]

Our local vaccine centre has put out a FB message :

“ the second jab is just a booster, it does NOT have to be the same type, in fact it might be better to mix them “ 

 

News to me !

[The Real Buh 3,423]

Just now, CANARYKING said:

Our local vaccine centre has put out a FB message :

“ the second jab is just a booster, it does NOT have to be the same type, in fact it might be better to mix them “ 

 

News to me !

They’ve let Karen on reception run the FB account 

[Well b back 3,186]

1 minute ago, CANARYKING said:

Our local vaccine centre has put out a FB message :

“ the second jab is just a booster, it does NOT have to be the same type, in fact it might be better to mix them “ 

 

News to me !

I would send that to your local MP and also to Downing Street. I would even send it to The EDP and BBC, and even if you are a Tory voter like me to Kier Starmer.

Doctors have reassured people this won’t happen, only yesterday PHE assured people this would not happen. This is about the biggest anti vax message you could ever send.
 

[Barbe bleu 812]

1 hour ago, keelansgrandad said:

Sounds like there is a case for many groups to be prioritised when you digest the argument.

VW has a very good point about keeping the vulnerable out of hospital. That is one point in favour of the system used at the moment. And of course, one argument that maybe 12 weeks between jabs is too long.

Supermarket workers could probably make a good case for priority. Teachers are pushing their case. Home Carers are pleading to be advanced in the queue.

And there will be mistakes which may not prevent a death. But the current system appears to be working so I doubt there will be much change apart from the odd exception.

I was of the opinion that we need to address spread once the top four are nearly done. 

But the numbers getting done are so vast now that I am not sure we really want to complicate things.  

 

[Icecream Snow 761]

Interesting slide from yesterdays press conference. As someone in the 40-44 block, I wouldn't be happy pausing the vaccination (as the WHO suggested) once the over 50's are done. Whilst the under-50 load on the NHS is lower, with a drastically reduced chance of death, it's still a massive strain.

[Van wink 2,994]

8 hours ago, Well b back said:

I would send that to your local MP and also to Downing Street. I would even send it to The EDP and BBC, and even if you are a Tory voter like me to Kier Starmer.

Doctors have reassured people this won’t happen, only yesterday PHE assured people this would not happen. This is about the biggest anti vax message you could ever send.
 

I believe they are recruiting volunteers for a study, 12 month follow up on volunteers,  if taken out of context  this may be something to do with that.

[Barry Brockes 145]

Yes, it's just been announced on the 7.00 news that trials are to start using two different vaccines with those two to be trialled in the UK being AZ and Pfizer.