Jump to content
Fuzzar

Corona Virus main thread

Recommended Posts

Those of you who keep saying, herd immunity doesn't work, could you please explain how vaccinations work?

Also if antibodies don't last how do you create a vaccine.

THIS IS THE POINT

0.23% OVERALL DEATHS

0.05 % DEATHS UNDER 70

you cannot hide from a virus and you cannot eradicate it, it will naturally become endemic.

Those of you who think New Zealand did a great job....you do realise they have put all their eggs in one basket so the reality is they have got no where.

Also the reality for New Zealand is COMPULSORY VACCINATION! are you happy about that?

 

Sweden got it right,

Well done Anders 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Change your diet, no processed food

Cut back on carbs

Get fit

Go outside more

Vitamin d3 

Vitamin c

Zinc

Stop fearing and start living 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about all you RWNJs do a big herd immunity trial amongst yourselves. If it works, great. If it doesn't, well, no big loss. A win win in my book. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, horsefly said:

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-herd-immunity-hopes-dashed-as-study-shows-covid-19-antibodies-fall-rapidly-after-recovery-12115510

This should be the final nail in the coffin of Prof Gupta's rash prognosis back in May that herd-immunity was already pretty much establshed and the virus was "on it's way out". 

I think there has been a suggestion for a while that there’d probably need to be regular jabs rather than a one off vaccine for the same reason. Interesting hypothesis in there that some people might have higher levels of antibodies because they are more regularly in contact with infected people. I suppose that makes sense. Again comes round full circle to the point that we need to weigh up making sure hospitals aren’t overwhelmed with not keeping restrictions in place that are too harsh or too long.  If shutting yourselves away for two months might make you more susceptible when you do come back out, then the lockdowns and restrictions should only go as far as is needed to stop hospitals being overwhelmed at any specific point.

Also interesting to see comments on seasonality of other related coronaviruses in the article, especially if we need regular jabs rather than a one off vaccine. If there is some seasonal element, do we treat it like a flu jab, or do we need to give regular jabs throughout the whole year? Of course, that’s also assuming we find a vaccine / jab that works - I seem to remember we never have done for any previous coronavirus?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Herman said:

How about all you RWNJs do a big herd immunity trial amongst yourselves. If it works, great. If it doesn't, well, no big loss. A win win in my book. 

Not that I’m arguing with your point, Herman, but I’ve never understood why demanding lockdowns and removal of “civil liberties” is seen as left wing and keeping things open as right wing. I would have thought the opposite if anything. I don’t see it as a right or left wing thing.

Share this post


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

I think there has been a suggestion for a while that there’d probably need to be regular jabs rather than a one off vaccine for the same reason. Interesting hypothesis in there that some people might have higher levels of antibodies because they are more regularly in contact with infected people. I suppose that makes sense. Again comes round full circle to the point that we need to weigh up making sure hospitals aren’t overwhelmed with not keeping restrictions in place that are too harsh or too long.  If shutting yourselves away for two months might make you more susceptible when you do come back out, then the lockdowns and restrictions should only go as far as is needed to stop hospitals being overwhelmed at any specific point.

Also interesting to see comments on seasonality of other related coronaviruses in the article, especially if we need regular jabs rather than a one off vaccine. If there is some seasonal element, do we treat it like a flu jab, or do we need to give regular jabs throughout the whole year? Of course, that’s also assuming we find a vaccine / jab that works - I seem to remember we never have done for any previous coronavirus?

Yep! Hopefully all efforts can concentrate on those issues now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

26 minutes ago, Bagster said:

 

Also the reality for New Zealand is COMPULSORY VACCINATION! are you happy about that?

 

They’re forcing people to get vaccinated against covid? Where is that reported?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Bagster said:

Those of you who keep saying, herd immunity doesn't work, could you please explain how vaccinations work?

Also if antibodies don't last how do you create a vaccine.

THIS IS THE POINT

0.23% OVERALL DEATHS

0.05 % DEATHS UNDER 70

you cannot hide from a virus and you cannot eradicate it, it will naturally become endemic.

Those of you who think New Zealand did a great job....you do realise they have put all their eggs in one basket so the reality is they have got no where.

Also the reality for New Zealand is COMPULSORY VACCINATION! are you happy about that?

 

Sweden got it right,

Well done Anders 

Are you seriously saying you don't know the difference between relying on a vaccine and relying on natural herd-immunity? The latest report I just provided a link for demonstrates that natural herd-immunity is a non-starter. It does not in the slightest imply that (repeated) vaccines won't work.

 

And just to clarify the difference: A vaccine is designed to stimulate the growth of antibodies to a virus whilst ensuring the individual doesn't go on to develop the symptoms of that virus (ideally and usually none of those symptoms). Herd-immunity relies on people catching the virus and hopefully developing enough antibody resistence to overcome the symptoms of the virus. It does NOT protect you from developing those symptoms in the first instance. The difference couldn't be more stark.

Edited by horsefly
clarification

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, horsefly said:

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-herd-immunity-hopes-dashed-as-study-shows-covid-19-antibodies-fall-rapidly-after-recovery-12115510

This should be the final nail in the coffin of Prof Gupta's rash prognosis back in May that herd-immunity was already pretty much establshed and the virus was "on it's way out". 

 

I tend it agree but nothing is ever certain.

Oddly I was back late last night and was going to answer some of the 'conspiracy' or odd ball theorists last night but couldn't be bothered - pointing out that already some people where getting reinfected, clusters like at Cranswick Country Foods (140 out of 300 so far test positive) would all tend NOT to support any thoughts of 'herd' or 'otherwise significant current immunity however acquired

This report then comes up which really does rather throw a bucket of much needed ice cold water on such claims. Wishful thinking indeed.

As to the vaccines - and there are many of them (200 ?) they are based on variety of underlying constructs (form 'dead' CV to fully engineered others' or other live viruses and while some my indeed suffer the same forgetfulness it's far from certain all will. That's my wishful thinking !

Yes Gupta, Levitt let alone their gullible followers should metaphorically put a sock in it at present in public (proper scientific debate OK) until they have some hard data and not belittle the issues needlessly risking people's lives on a theory that doesn't seem to hold up.  

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Herman said:

How about all you RWNJs do a big herd immunity trial amongst yourselves. If it works, great. If it doesn't, well, no big loss. A win win in my book. 

I was hoping that TFL would have a tube carriage for people who don’t wish to wear masks, a bit like the old smokers carriages. 

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, horsefly said:

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-herd-immunity-hopes-dashed-as-study-shows-covid-19-antibodies-fall-rapidly-after-recovery-12115510

This should be the final nail in the coffin of Prof Gupta's rash prognosis back in May that herd-immunity was already pretty much establshed and the virus was "on it's way out". 

Actually it isn't.   She said that antibodies in serum (ie circulating in blood) were only one marker of immunity and that there could be other, dark matter, causes of immunity (t cells and IgA antibodies in the respiratory tract possibly).  

It was this dark matter immunity and rhe persistence of memory that we should be looking at, not fleeting serum levels.

In not saying that she is right and nor am I presenting a hypothesis but she is not wrong because you want her to be wrong

 

Edited by Barbe bleu
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

Actually it isn't.   She said that antibodies in serum (ie circulating in blood) were only one marker of immunity and that there could be other, dark matter, causes of immunity (t cells and IgA antibodies in the respiratory tract possibly).  

It was this dark matter immunity and rhe persistence of memory that we should be looking at, not fleeting serum levels.

In not saying that she is right and nor am I presenting a hypothesis but she is not wrong because you want her to be wrong

 

Here's the BBc one - it does tend to answer that query.  As noted nothing is ever certain but it just makes 'herd immunity'  ploys even more unlikely as solution let alone a 'policy.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54696873

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bagster said:

The figures are 0.23 % of the overall population

It then becomes 0.05% of the under 70's

So your math is completely wrong

Please read the link I put with the actual figures then there can be no dispute.

Of course deaths will drop now because of the treatments but again please see the bbc link I put last night ( unless you feel that they lied ) because of the way they have learnt to keep hospitals running now there is no effect to cancer treatments or monograms, only what is classed as non essential operations.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bagster said:

Those of you who keep saying, herd immunity doesn't work, could you please explain how vaccinations work?

Also if antibodies don't last how do you create a vaccine.

THIS IS THE POINT

0.23% OVERALL DEATHS

0.05 % DEATHS UNDER 70

you cannot hide from a virus and you cannot eradicate it, it will naturally become endemic.

Those of you who think New Zealand did a great job....you do realise they have put all their eggs in one basket so the reality is they have got no where.

Also the reality for New Zealand is COMPULSORY VACCINATION! are you happy about that?

 

Sweden got it right,

Well done Anders 

Please see the link I put on last night.
It seems via Zoe and the ONS that just like a cold you seem to begin to lose your immunity after 3 months. The only way out therefore is vaccination as to date and hopefully that will stay the same immunity is strong still ( according to phase 2 results ) even in the over 55s.

YOU HAVE NOT PROVIDED ME WITH THE LINK I ASKED FOR YESTERDAY REGARDS GOVERMENT POLICY CHANGING AND UNDER 18S BEING VACCINATED. If you are not prepared to provide the link I will have to assume you yourself were providing the misinformation put people of taking the vaccine. That at this moment in time is not in this Countries or the Worlds interest. The information on safety will be published.

With regards your compulsory vaccinations I will answer that separately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Here's the BBc one - it does tend to answer that query.  As noted nothing is ever certain but it just makes 'herd immunity'  ploys even more unlikely as solution let alone a 'policy.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54696873

Hi YF

Yes I put that link last night. There are thousands of ZOE tweets as well and I can’t find the one from about 2 weeks ago where ZOE tweeted they were getting worried that a NUMBER of people seemed to be reinfected, and they were studying this data closely. I hope these thoughts are right that the 2nd infection is milder, as the reports from the US have quoted a person that had it much worse second time round ( I think they died but I can’t be certain ).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Well b back said:

Hi YF

Yes I put that link last night. There are thousands of ZOE tweets as well and I can’t find the one from about 2 weeks ago where ZOE tweeted they were getting worried that a NUMBER of people seemed to be reinfected, and they were studying this data closely. I hope these thoughts are right that the 2nd infection is milder, as the reports from the US have quoted a person that had it much worse second time round ( I think they died but I can’t be certain ).

https://covid.joinzoe.com/post/covid-reinfection-immunity

This one Wbb?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Barbe bleu said:

Actually it isn't.   She said that antibodies in serum (ie circulating in blood) were only one marker of immunity and that there could be other, dark matter, causes of immunity (t cells and IgA antibodies in the respiratory tract possibly).  

It was this dark matter immunity and rhe persistence of memory that we should be looking at, not fleeting serum levels.

In not saying that she is right and nor am I presenting a hypothesis but she is not wrong because you want her to be wrong

 

Do you think any government could even begin to plot a strategy to combat the virus based on these unproven speculations for which there is no evidence? And yes she most certainly was wrong that the virus was "on its way out" in May. It's got nothing to do with "wanting" her to be wrong, she was. There is a reason why her position is a very small minority in the scientific community. 

More importantly, my point was fundamentally about herd-immunity. Even in the very unlikely event that she is right about so-called "dark matter immunity" it doesn't alter one iota what the report says about the decline in antibodies to the virus. If "dark matter immunity" is supposed to be at work it isn't working well enough to spread antibodies in the population, they are in decline and infections are inreasing rapidly. Just take a look at the rapid rise of infections around the world and it doesn't give you any reason to think that "dark matter immunity" is at work anywhere (France had over 50,000 yesterday).

And it is this point that makes the strategy of relying on herd-immunity a non-starter. So actually it is the final nail in the coffin of her approach.

Edited by horsefly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, sonyc said:

That's a brilliant article. It says in clear , simple form and with links what I have been trying  to say on here for months, including over the last few days with bill.

My key take aways

Antibody response first peaks and then declines within weeks of symptoms.

Likely that antibodies persist for 2-3 years.

Reinfection possible but numbers still low and ( not clear from this article if zeverity is the same)

We have overlooked T cell response in favour of b cells (we have made important what we can easily measure and not measured what is more important).

T cells might be the dark matter that means we were far better 'prepared' than we thought .

Some estimates put prior immunity at 20-50%

It is all still uncertain so caution, but caution laced with optimism, is the order of the day.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

How about all you RWNJs do a big herd immunity trial amongst yourselves

I wonder, what would we call such a herd? 🤔🤣

Apples

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Do you think any government could even begin to plot a strategy to combat the virus based on these unproven speculations for which there is no evidence? And yes she most certainly was wrong that the virus was "on its way out" in May. It's got nothing to do with "wanting" her to be wrong, she was. There is a reason why her position is a very small minority in the scientific community. 

More importantly, my point was fundamentally about herd-immunity. Even in the very unlikely event that she is right about so-called "dark matter immunity" it doesn't alter one iota what the report says about the decline in antibodies to the virus. If "dark matter immunity" is supposed to be at work it isn't working well enough to spread antibodies in the population, they are in decline. And it is this point that makes the strategy of relying on herd-immunity a non-starter. So actually it is the final nail in the coffin of her approach.

I'm making a neutral point on a scientific discussion i am not inviting anyone to agree with a hypothesis in one direction or the other.  I am only inviting people to think about the possibilities.

I dont wish to be disrespectful (and I really don't wish to get into another fight with you)  but of course antibody levels in serum decline. If they didn't we would constantly be tooled up for a never-ending war on every single pathogen we had ever encountered  and the body simply cannot sustain that. And how on earth would t cells 'spread antibodies in the population' ??!!

Declining levels though don't necessarily mean that we don't have some level of immunity.

Honestly, read the Zoe article and the papers it links to. 

For what it is worth I am optimistic. I think we are over the worst of it, we see this in every statistic. However, there is some way still to go and there is much capacity for more death and suffering. I would be in favour of a second lockdown if it were targetted and with a clear goal(s). Timing would be crucial.

Edited by Barbe bleu
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Barbe bleu said:

I'm making a neutral point on a scientific discussion i am not inviting anyone to agree with a hypothesis in one direction or the other.  I am only inviting people to think about the possibilities.

I dont wish to be disrespectful (and I really don't wish to get into another fight with you)  but of course antibody levels in serum decline. If they didn't we would constantly be tooled up for a never-ending war on every single pathogen we had ever encountered  and the body simply cannot sustain that. And how on earth would t cells 'spread antibodies in the population' ??!!

Declining levels though don't necessarily mean that we don't have some level of immunity.

Honestly, read the Zoe article and the papers it links to. 

For what it is worth I am optimistic. I think we are over the worst of it, we see this in every statistic. However, there is some way still to go and there is much capacity for more death and suffering. I would be in favour of a second lockdown if it were targetted and with a clear goal(s). Timing would be crucial.

Absolutely, we can have a level of immunity that may  help prevent the most serious clinical outcomes from Covid 19 without necessarily preventing the spread of infection, as stated earlier. One of the reasons we have been hit so badly by this is that there was no residual immunity in the population, or so it is believed, as it’s a novel virus.

Edited by Van wink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Barbe bleu said:

I'm making a neutral point on a scientific discussion i am not inviting anyone to agree with a hypothesis in one direction or the other.  I am only inviting people to think about the possibilities.

I dont wish to be disrespectful (and I really don't wish to get into another fight with you)  but of course antibody levels in serum decline. If they didn't we would constantly be tooled up for a never-ending war on every single pathogen we had ever encountered  and the body simply cannot sustain that. And how on earth would t cells 'spread antibodies in the population' ??!!

Declining levels though don't necessarily mean that we don't have some level of immunity.

Honestly, read the Zoe article and the papers it links to. 

For what it is worth I am optimistic. I think we are over the worst of it, we see this in every statistic. However, there is some way still to go and there is much capacity for more death and suffering. I would be in favour of a second lockdown if it were targetted and with a clear goal(s). Timing would be crucial.

And indeed I respect anyone that is keen to follow the science, obviously including yourself. My main point remains that any idea that we can develop a Covid-19 strategy premissed on the idea of herd-immunity is now dead.  Even if it were the case that some level of dark matter immunity existed the clear evidence is that another spiraling surge of infections is hitting most of Europe. So whatever level of dark matter immunity exists (if any) it isn't enough to protect health care services from potentially being overwhelmed by hospitalizations from rising infections. Surely we need to concentrate on methods that can prevent that from happening and clearly herd-immunity can not help with that task.

Edited by horsefly
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Absolutely, we can have a level of immunity that may  help prevent the most serious clinical outcomes from Covid 19 without necessarily preventing the spread of infection, as stated earlier. One of the reasons we have been hit so badly by this is that there was no residual immunity in the population, or so it is believed, as it’s a novel virus.

Agree VW - but the important point is 'may'. Nobody knows. At the moment we have not much more than a few either way anecdotal reports and an hypothesis.

I thought the report though had some useful pointers or insights (ignoring the headline herd immunity doubts)  - the idea that the CV19 is evolved to fox our immune systems to give continuous reinfections after a short lull (rather like like colds and flu) - but that doesn't then infer that the next cold/flu reinfection is any less nasty. Other health or environmental factors may well play a role in how serious any (re)infection becomes.

More evidence needed but caution has to be the catchword.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Aggy said:

Not that I’m arguing with your point, Herman, but I’ve never understood why demanding lockdowns and removal of “civil liberties” is seen as left wing and keeping things open as right wing. I would have thought the opposite if anything. I don’t see it as a right or left wing thing.

I know you're right and it's easy to get myself drawn into this daft tribalism. The vast majority of us, left and right, simply want a sensible and safe route through this disaster. 

My frustration is for those that were international experts on trade and finance a few weeks ago and now have become international experts of medicine. It's the same people and they are pumping out similar duff info. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone (can't recall which poster) stated this thread was becoming like the Brexit thread with the two camps. It does appear there ARE broad correlations between those right of centre (save the economy and health thereby) versus more cautious centrist/left leaning posters. Not exactly but very interesting nevertheless. It means one just gets rehashed articles from each camp (irrespective of what one thinks about the government which is criticised by many).

I don't know what to think but if pushed to determine a route I think I would be influencing a full lockdown (a fire break) with much stronger economic support (far better than Sunak's....90 or 100%) and then relax greatly after 2/3 weeks. Israel did it? (need to research). 

I feel that a short lock would break the rate of hospitalisation and arguably might be less damaging than the Tier 2 or Tier 3 restrictions in place. We are about to go into Tier 3 this week (West Yorkshire). For months and months we have already had measures. It is not good for business (or families!). It hasn't stopped infections and deaths are rising. A short while ago we had 65 new cases, now we are closing in on 10k (this morning in low 9000s).

The tiers don't seem to be one thing or another. A kind of cop out. I would rather a lock then an opening and to repeat this right into vaccine release and distribution. The tiers are a little like a long term death. I realise this view will be heavily criticised! But unless we just leave it to run (with distancing in place etc) then I only see the need to have a lockdown anyway. I like reading the 0.25% risk type articles and links some posters add here. They make some sense but don't address the NHS issue enough for me. We are having to take a careful approach because our NHS is so vulnerable. That takes the debate into deeper political water of course. For once, rather than an array of reactive responses I think that the Welsh and Irish admins should be applauded for real leadership and strong action (of course they yet may be proved wrong).

Edited by sonyc
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aggy said:

I think there has been a suggestion for a while that there’d probably need to be regular jabs rather than a one off vaccine for the same reason. Interesting hypothesis in there that some people might have higher levels of antibodies because they are more regularly in contact with infected people. I suppose that makes sense. Again comes round full circle to the point that we need to weigh up making sure hospitals aren’t overwhelmed with not keeping restrictions in place that are too harsh or too long.  If shutting yourselves away for two months might make you more susceptible when you do come back out, then the lockdowns and restrictions should only go as far as is needed to stop hospitals being overwhelmed at any specific point.

Also interesting to see comments on seasonality of other related coronaviruses in the article, especially if we need regular jabs rather than a one off vaccine. If there is some seasonal element, do we treat it like a flu jab, or do we need to give regular jabs throughout the whole year? Of course, that’s also assuming we find a vaccine / jab that works - I seem to remember we never have done for any previous coronavirus?

I am a bit of a vaccine wizz Aggy as many will tell you. In March I didn’t even know what a vaccine was now I becoming an armchair expert.

A bit of history in that you are right they haven’t found a vaccine in the past, but despite contrary believe Oxford had been working on this vaccine for a number of years. To trial a vaccine thoroughly you need money, lots of money and then more money at each stage and then people to test your vaccine. I am sure you appreciate money for a non existent disease is very hard to get, think of the outcry there would have been if the government said we are just providing ( its a lot more now but the initial sum ) £162 million to some mad people who think nature’s next attack will be a Coronavirus they would have been crucified. So they started to obtain, as was the norm private funding. Of course this would seem like money down the drain but it’s a bit like metal detecting you are unlikely to find something but if you do and the disease really comes you will finish up with untold riches.

As scientists in December ( I mean this in a nice way ) this must have become a very exciting time, the moment they had been waiting for. In January they were sent the dna from China, would it really work ?. At this point they have a vaccine after years of testing that they know is safe but what will they need to do to alter it to attack the virus, of course in their heads they must have been so excited like you say everything has failed with colds, can this really work. They began their computer models, and within days found the missing part to the jigsaw, not only that on their computers just like on our computer games the virus was blowing up in front of them. Strangely enough once the virus took hold around the world Goverment attitude was a little different, how much will it take to see if it works. I will make a quick point here that you will see people saying this vaccine has only been in development months, strictly that’s true, but the vaccine itself without the one small addition was already known to be safe.

Oxford could then unlike many others move to the next part of the journey, it works on a computer game does it work ie create an immune response in animals - it did. They advanced through the normal tests and it seemed to remain safe, so they could move back into humans with their new vaccine. At the same time was one one of their most well known experiments, the Rhesus monkeys. 6 of these monkeys were given the vaccine the rest were not. They were all then given the virus. The virus was given to them in massive doses, larger than we could have conceivably got in natural surroundings. The findings to the press alarming - the 6 monkeys had caught coronavirus virus, to Oxford their first part of success and a discovery that put them onto the next part of the journey. Firstly the 6 had been given these massive doses in their noses. The place where the virus had taken hold was in their noses, on none of the monkeys had it travelled to their lungs, because of the massive doses it had travelled to the lungs with the rest. It doesn’t work yelled some of the press, Oxford released a press statement, worst case scenario we know we now have a vaccine that at least in monkeys protects you from the worse. But what do they do now, what had they got wrong ?
Unlike previously of course where it was difficult to get volunteers for a vaccine trial for a non existent disease, they now had thousands including me and a number of people on the message board. Initial injections had begun. To show the anti vaxers and conspiracy theorists were already present, the first person to have the vaccine within days was reported dead. Normally there would be confidentiality but Oxford felt they had to wheel the lady out, the anti vaxers claiming of course this was pre recorded.
What next though in view of the monkey experiment. They could try lots of things they could up the dose at the point of the jab, or I am not sure if this was found by luck, people already having the jab they could give them a booster. The initial tests showed that some of the immune responses were as good as anything they could ever have imagined, many however had an adequate immune response that was in line therefore with the monkey experiment. Then the thing that changed everything not just for Oxford but many others including Pfizer, they called a % back and gave them a second dose. In due course they called them back and wow they all had the immunity at higher levels than ever thought possible. Hence the reason why with similar vaccines such as Pfizer and Novax you will need 2 jabs 28 days apart to protect you they hope from catching it, but certainly from the severe effects.

Phase 1 results were in it does what they were hoping for, it creates an immune response. Now to move to safety, they were already fairly certain ( remember this was not a new vaccine other than a very slight alteration ) and the limited numbers vaccinated to date had not received anymore than you would expect with the flu jab ie some fever, headaches all disappearing within 24 hours.

At this stage ( as with other vaccines being produced ) their 80 % certainty ( as stated by Professor Sarah Gilbert when the first human was vaccinated ) was now looking way better. Everything that you would hope a vaccine to do it does. In normal times of course the next stage proving it works would take years as there would be no disease and few volunteers. Human challenge in the past was a way of proving a vaccine worked, scientists used to inject often themselves with the vaccine and then the disease, wow how brave were they. Let’s do the same many cried and a group was formed, which has tens of thousands signed ( one day sooner ) to volunteer to have the vaccines and then be given Coronavirus. There was a problem. This virus did not have a treatment. What if somebody became seriously ill, what if somebody died. WHO also stated this was not ethical. But that didn’t matter Oxford ( and others ) now had thousands of volunteers for phase 3 - does it work and the virus was running rampant in the U.K. They had to wait however for those safety results, was it safe. Yes the results were in. They could now move to phases 2 and 3 in record time.
At this point producers paired of with people capable of producing the vaccines on mass. As you will be aware Oxford paired with AstraZeneca. To not go in to deeply on that, they in turn signed deals with countries all over the world that would enable them to produce the vaccine as soon as they were happy it worked. Again to destroy 2 myths from the anti vaxers they pledged to supply the vaccine to 3rd world countries at cost ( groups of countries have since been formed to finance third world countries doses by donation, which will not be repayable ) and they are producing a vaccine at their own cost ( clearly governments fund some of it ).
Inoculation began of the masses. 30,000 would need the jab as several hundred will need to catch the virus to see if it works. This would be done by 50% receiving the vaccine and 50% a placebo. A group of 3 people only would hold the data on who received what. The target was set that to be of use to the world it would need to protect a minimum of 50 % of people. All was going well until a situation that we had hoped for and the scientists working on the vaccine had dreaded cases in the U.K. were dropping dramatically, our volunteers would have to do well to catch it now and they needed people catching it ASAP. AstraZeneca however shopped around and managed deals with Brazil, South Africa and the US. Volunteers were not difficult to find.

So until recently the scientists prayed and we waited for news as Oxford and Pfizer in particular moved the date for their results to be released further and further into the future. There were many hurdles a suspension whilst being investigated as somebody fell ill with an unexplained illness ( anti vaxers will try to convince you it was due to the vaccine but it wasn’t ). Trump fatally used this to suspend Oxford and Pfizer in the States to slow these to benefit US vaccine producers, but he was to late. Then a death in Brazil from Coronavirus of somebody in the trial, of course the anti vaxers celebrated ( celebrating a death wow ) so AstraZeneca had to take the highly unusual step of breaking confidentiality and release news to the anti vaxers that this guy was on the placebo.

So we come to the current time and we all hope this journey is coming to an end. Phase 2 results are in for Oxford and will be published in the next few days. Does it give an immune response in all those receiving 2 jabs - Yes. Will that immune response last forever - Nobody knows but it appears as strong after 4 months as it did after the second jab was given. Will a vaccine work - It is now very likely a vaccine will work and your immune system seems to react and give you far better protection than having the virus. Ah I hear you cry after hearing the anti vaxers challenge it will not protect the older people - phase 2 results ( which have been released and are about to go out on paper ) suggest the opposite with over 55’s immune response showing excellent results. Is it safe - I don’t know how that is worked out but phase 1 and 2 results show it is safe. 
The world now awaits the final result, it seems that Oxford ( and similarly Pfizer ) work but it can’t be judged on the bodies response, the final data handed to our 3 panelist’s ( if that’s the word ) has to be conclusive. When will that be ? Some say the results are already in ( or at least enough to make a judgement ) if they aren’t it will be very soon. But it takes months to approve it I hear you cry again and the anti vaxers will of course tell you ( correctly ) that this will need very quick approval for emergency use. This is different however. Normally somebody like Oxford would go through all these stages ( with very limited numbers see initial history and funding ) and then have to present it to the authorities. Of course there would be hundreds of questions and very few people working on the vaccine. There maybe situations where the governing body require a volunteer to have had x, with limited volunteers that may push them back to square 1. In this instance the governing body have worked with them at every stage. Each milestone has seen the papers handed in to approve or send Oxford back out to come back with further info. Instead of 2 people at each side there are hundreds. So is approval being got quicker than usual, yes, is that because it’s coronavirus, yes but that can be clarified by hundreds of people are doing the work of 4 people. There are growing reports that the final parts of those approvals are being put together for Pfizer and Oxford. It is anticipated healthcare workers and care home residents and carers will be vaccinated in the next few weeks. It will then be rolled out in an order that seems to have been already decided via a Goverment statement. Don’t get totally excited though there are 2 important things to bear in mind. The first is we have not seen those results yet and it may not work, the good news is people seem very confident to the point we have changed the law to allow the roll out of the vaccine and ministers have told us there maybe a vaccine by the end of the year. Couple that with the NHS have been told to learn how to administer a vaccine that could be here imminently with India beginning to manufacture 3 billion doses its looking promising. Secondly and unfortunately this will not change anything regards social distancing, crowds behaviours until at least the summer, if the anti vaxers get their way we may have to wait for a cure. This will not put an end to Coronavirus, at least in the foreseeable future.

Now to the future. 
The first things to note is the difficulty in the mass roll out. The initial vaccines will need 2 doses and need to be frozen so if we had 40 million doses as an absolute max that would only vaccinate 20 million. For the world to take it will be a massive programme but something that I am sure most would see as a benefit to the whole world. What if it mutates, well we are apparently already working on that and not only that scientists are this time be given funding to predict what will come next and be ready for most eventualities. Do vaccines protect ? If the science being collected fro South Africa proves correct we had a vaccine all along, we just never realised as South Africa are one of the last places on earth to give the BCG vaccine, which is now being held responsible for their astonishingly good results. Future vaccines such as Johnson and Johnson will be 1 dose ( if they work ) and not needed to be kept at temperature.

Finally in answer to Bagsters question of compulsory vaccination, this is something I really can’t answer with any certainty. Already some Countries have stated vaccination will be compulsory, although most would be the usual suspects China, Russia there are already quite a number that you wouldn’t expect New Zealand and Argentina to name a couple. This is different, this is a disease that countries fear and in the future will they fear that disease coming into their countries. Here’s some questions for you to discuss. At present if you travel to certain countries you have to quarantine when you get there ( likewise travelling back ). Will those Countries in the future change that to if you haven’t had the jab you are not entering our country. If they do then what. If the masses have the jab will the then minority become social outcasts ?. In a couple of years there will most likely be treatments, but if there isn’t or it mutates into more of a killer or it is proven a good % catching it have complications for the rest of their lives what will happen then will you be stopped from going to football grounds, cinemas and pubs ? These are discussions I don’t know the answers.

One last thought if ( I stress if so I am not misinterpreted ) it is like a cold and we can catch it every 6 - 12 months are we prepared to carry on as is for the foreseeable future or does that alone change your mind. I understand fully that 95% of us over 60 will be queuing already in our heads for the vaccination once it is deemed safe and effective. I also appreciate the further down the age groups you go the more you will be thinking a vaccine is more likely to kill me than Coronavirus. It is up to the powers that be to give you the facts. Despite Bagsters claim about children unless the government change policy under 18’s will NOT be vaccinated.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bravo Wbb!! Your investigative skills are second to none. You should be standing for some civic/public office, such is your dedication to information and steadfastness and truth seeking. Thank you for such an informative post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, sonyc said:

Bravo Wbb!! Your investigative skills are second to none. You should be standing for some civic/public office, such is your dedication to information and steadfastness and truth seeking. Thank you for such an informative post.

Lol

I knew nothing when I started the come on Sarah thread. Most I have learnt from newspapers abroad. The NY Times maybe criticised for some things but on this topic they really have been second to none. 
I hope my post has brought over like most of this pandemic there will be differing opinions and I really do appreciate both sides of the arguments on this one, if I was 20 I would be siding on the side of the anti vaxers. I one for argued why should I be forced to wear a seat belt. If my car catches fire I will be burnt alive as I will not be able to get my seat belt off, what a total illogical argument and 20 year olds now would probably laugh at me. 
I have no objection with people discussing those differences, some will have very good arguments, especially if the world makes vaccination compulsory or even WHO recommend similar to the measles jab. What I have a problem with is some completely untrue / misinformation. For instance I accept if I am 20 I have a concern as coronavirus might not get me and will happily discuss it, but things like a person in Brazil who had the vaccination died I have a problem with as it is completely untrue ( to our knowledge ).

Something I should have added is that those that don’t want a jab there is good news on the horizon in that the technology now coming through is not a jab but an electric jolt that stimulates your immune system, only time will tell if that works. Also of course it is highly unlikely the first past the post will be the best but who knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...