New vaccine

[terrierjohn]

1 hour ago, ace2542 said:

These American RNA vaccines are more effective. They use part of the virus genetic code against it. The Astra doesn't do that. It uses a modified cold virus apparently hence the lower effectiveness perhaps.

If you read further you will see that AZ vaccine modifies the cold virus to replicate the Sars Cov2 virus, which is the tech name for the covid virus, and like the prior 2 it is also safe and does not involve any live virus.

[pete14]

23 minutes ago, Josy1953 said:

I agree 100%.

All of my appointments during in the trial have been very professional and have given me no reason to be concerned.  It seemed to be very quiet this morning compared to my 2 previous appointments I wondered whether people have dropped out or whether they were extremely busy earlier in the week.

I got there at 10am and was out by 11am.

Hi Josy,

 

We arrived at 10:25 and got through quickly. I think it was quicker because none of the doctors had been called elsewhere due to an emergency (as had one doctor from a fortnight ago when we had appointment 2). In addition, there was no injection nor recovery / observation time needed. They also seemed to be more flexible about the order they did things in. 

[jeanlyon]

35 minutes ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

Utter nonsense.   That's an arrogant suggestion which totally fails to take into account that millions upon millions of people have already had Covid and thus have way better immunity than any vaccine can provide.   Are you proposing to raise vacinees to sainthood whilst leaving all the millions of other immune people as 2nd class citizens?!!  Wow.  That's the stuff of WW2 discrimination.

 

 

Actually that's not correct.  Some people who have had Covid, after 3 months they had tests and found no antibodies to it at all.

[pete14]

20 minutes ago, KnowTheScore said:

Nonsense, that's just a cop-out.  It's perfectly easy to do your research looking at bonefied studies from reputable bodies.  All the pertinent info is out there.

 

Pete14 said:

Any vaccine that proves not to work or to have harmful side effects when used in the general population is likely to be hit with legal action bigger than we have ever seen. That prospect should give us confidence in their vaccines.

 

What would you call "big" legal action?  Would pay out of $4 BILLION be classed as big?  That's how much has already been paid out to victims who have been harmed by vaccines, some very seriously harmed with things like Gullian Barre Syndrome or other life debilitating conditions. 

 

Pete14 said:

Manufacturers stand to lose more than they gain, especially those who are selling the vaccine at cost price.

 

This is awfully naive.  Vaccine manufacturers are totally protected by law.  The US passed laws ages ago that mean that vaccine manufacturers can not be sued by the public if their vaccines cause harm.  Just let that sink in.  You can not sue the vaccine company if your child is killed by a vaccine.  What you do instead is seek compensation via the government Vaccine Compensation Programme.

The manufacturers can't lose.  They are immune.  They are raking in $billions in profits.  Even if they had to pay out a few $million in compensation to someone they would still be making vast profits.

Flu vaccine have terrible efficacy.  Even on a good year they are at best 50%-60% effective.  But that in no way stops their sales.  It all comes down to marketing.
 

pete14 said:

I have just returned from my third vaccine trial appointment for the Novavax virus. Nothing I have heard, seen or experienced during those 3 appointments leads me to believe that corners are being cut, quite the opposite in fact.

 

Could you explain why they are applying for "Emergency Approval Authority" for the vaccines instead of just going through normal safety and testing process?

 

I have no interest in responding to your comments. I have stated my opinion and feel absolutely no need to change anything I wrote. 
 

However, I find it curious that your arguments seem to be based on figures and law of USA, not UK.
 

All manufacturers are applying for emergency approval because we are in a grave emergency and delay costs lives. 

[pete14]

26 minutes ago, yorkshirephil said:

 

 

Respect to you on the trial and good luck. I am down for 3 different trials but not been approached to actually take part, albeit I have Asthma which may be against me initially even though that raises my risk to covid.

 

I think  volunteers invited are based both on geography and existing medical conditions. It would be worrying if people were ruled out on the grounds that they have asthma because asthmatics will need to take a vaccine along with everybody else. They are included in the trials. It is more likely that you live a distance away from a venue where trials are taking place.

[Selbourne]

Perhaps it’s just me, but I will have any and every (if possible) vaccination, full dose, part dose or whatever. I’m desperate for life to return to normal and see this as the only way. I judge the risk of harm from the vaccine as remote, but the risk of long term illness, or even death, from getting the virus as much higher. 

[yorkshirephil]

5 minutes ago, jeanlyon said:

Actually that's not correct.  Some people who have had Covid, after 3 months they had tests and found no antibodies to it at all.

And there lies another problem. We are all different and react differently to treatment. Until we have data to prove anything most is hearsay and opinion. Even when a vaccine becomes available some people will react differently and get better immunity than others which has been demonstrated to a degree during covid trials. Originally it was mooted that you couldn't get covid twice, until someone did. These cases seem to be rare but do happen. We also don't know how fast or often covid will mutate, which would effect the efficacy of the vaccine, whether it be for better or worse. Yes there is light at the end of the tunnel but we still have some way to go.

[yorkshirephil]

1 minute ago, Selbourne said:

Perhaps it’s just me, but I will have any and every (if possible) vaccination, full dose, part dose or whatever. I’m desperate for life to return to normal and see this as the only way. I judge the risk of harm from the vaccine as remote, but the risk of long term illness, or even death, from getting the virus as much higher. 

That is pretty much how I see it, as I have stated before it will be a difficult decision for a lot of people.

[terrierjohn]

15 minutes ago, KnowTheScore said:

Pete14 - "There will never be 300 cases among a ship of 3000 with vaccines insisted upon"
 

I don't agree but it of course depends on the length of the cruise.   At the moment the tentative attempts of cruise lines to get sailing again are mostly short one week affairs which is obviously being done because the COVID incubation period is around 7 days so if everyone is checked before boarding then there's no real chance of there being an "outbreak" within 7 days.  People will be disembarked at the end of the week before symptoms kick in, then it's no longer the cruise line's problem.

 

Once you start with 2.5 week cruises and longer then the realities will kick in.

 

You can't morally stop people cruising if they've had Covid and thus have immunity.  If they attempt to do that the industry will suffer enormously.   They'll end up with a tiny subset of the cruising audience, the stuffy old 75+ yr olds who of course will all get vaccinated due to their risk levels.

That's not where cruise lines want to be.  They want the lively younger jet set who spend lots of money.

 

When did the Jet set start cruising, even the premium lines are way too down market for them.

 

As regards limiting cruising to those who have been vaccinated, I think you will find that gets the vote from the majority in the country, and they will probably want it extending to all public transport and airlines  as well as hotels, restaurants, pubs and other entertainment venues.

No one should be forced to have the vaccine, but they should understand the consequences if not.

[terrierjohn]

2 minutes ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

No it really won't.

 

Millions of young people won't be taking the vaccines as their risks of getting and dying from Covid are so infinitesimally small.   The older, vulnerable demographic are a tiny subset of society.  86% of Covid cases have no symptoms at all and a further percentage only have mild symptoms that don't require treatment or hospitalisation.   99% of people survive Covid. 

 

You're simply not going to be able to justify WW2 style draconian measures on the back of such numbers.   I swear some people would love to see go back to ID papers and rationing !

 

Not sure about rationing, although the brexit remainers seem to think that will happen anyway after December, but ID cards would get my vote.

[zap99]

7 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

Not sure about rationing, although the brexit remainers seem to think that will happen anyway after December, but ID cards would get my vote.

Yes please to the jab. If I go on holiday abroad I take a passport and driving licence. In the UK I carry a driving licence only. I would prefer not to carry an ID card, but not too bothered if I have to. If I need to carry a vaccination card, again not bothered. The world is changing.

[davecttr]

15 minutes ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

No it really won't.

 

Millions of young people won't be taking the vaccines as their risks of getting and dying from Covid are so infinitesimally small.   The older, vulnerable demographic are a tiny subset of society.  86% of Covid cases have no symptoms at all and a further percentage only have mild symptoms that don't require treatment or hospitalisation.   99% of people survive Covid. 

 

You're simply not going to be able to justify WW2 style draconian measures on the back of such numbers.   I swear some people would love to see go back to ID papers and rationing !

 

Not so, there are over 16 million people in the UK aged 60 or older, that's over 23% of the population, hardly a tiny subset

[pete14]

52 minutes ago, KnowTheScore said:

Pete14 - "There will never be 300 cases among a ship of 3000 with vaccines insisted upon"
 

I don't agree but it of course depends on the length of the cruise.   At the moment the tentative attempts of cruise lines to get sailing again are mostly short one week affairs which is obviously being done because the COVID incubation period is around 7 days so if everyone is checked before boarding then there's no real chance of there being an "outbreak" within 7 days.  People will be disembarked at the end of the week before symptoms kick in, then it's no longer the cruise line's problem.

 

Once you start with 2.5 week cruises and longer then the realities will kick in.

 

You can't morally stop people cruising if they've had Covid and thus have immunity.  If they attempt to do that the industry will suffer enormously.   They'll end up with a tiny subset of the cruising audience, the stuffy old 75+ yr olds who of course will all get vaccinated due to their risk levels.

That's not where cruise lines want to be.  They want the lively younger jet set who spend lots of money.

 

Please don’t quote me as writing something I did not write.

[sogne]

2 or 3 years ago Psizer failed in an attempt to take over Astra Zeneca

 

[wowzz]

4 minutes ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

Many of them will have had Covid and thus gained strong natural immunity.  I would expect that many of them like young people, will refuse to take the vaccines.

As you only deal in facts, please tell us how you come to that spurious assumption. And please, as we are in the UK, limit your response to UK only sources.

[Josy1953]

1 hour ago, pete14 said:

Hi Josy,

 

We arrived at 10:25 and got through quickly. I think it was quicker because none of the doctors had been called elsewhere due to an emergency (as had one doctor from a fortnight ago when we had appointment 2). In addition, there was no injection nor recovery / observation time needed. They also seemed to be more flexible about the order they did things in. 

I was expecting to be out fairly quickly because we were not having an injection but I was surprised how few people were there today.  I had expected similar numbers to the previous appointments but maybe they are coming towards the end of the trial.  I know that it started before my first appointment so perhaps some of the people who were there on my earlier appointments were there for their 2nd or 3rd appointments and they are now winding down the numbers.

[davecttr]

1 minute ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

Many of them will have had Covid and thus gained strong natural immunity.  I would expect that many of them like young people, will refuse to take the vaccines.

Well with figures suggesting about 10% of the population have had COVID spread among all age groups suggests about 10% of them have had the disease, approx 1.6 million !

 

Strong natural immunity? nobody knows yet plus if a vaccine promotes the same positive immune responses as the actual virus why would natural immunity be better, especially as you have to take the chance of dying or having long term effects to get that immunity, more so if you are old.

[davecttr]

I wrote this about 4 hours ago

 

"There might also be politics involved, was AstraZenica 'encouraged' to publish results to early because the vaccine was 'British' and a British good news story needed? I have no evidence of this of course"

 

Now there is a news item reporting that No10 wants the Union flag printed on AstraVenica Covid vaccine.

 

😁😱 😁😱 😁😱 😁😱 😁😱 😁😱

[terrierjohn]

1 hour ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

Many of them will have had Covid and thus gained strong natural immunity.  I would expect that many of them like young people, will refuse to take the vaccines.

What makes you think that, I would expect they would be very happy to have the jab and to carry an I'd card which includes their vaccination history.

[wowzz]

4 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

What makes you think that, I would expect they would be very happy to have the jab and to carry an I'd card which includes their vaccination history.

I asked the same question  - answer came there none ! 

[Ardennais]

My children, all in their 20s, can’t wait for a vaccine.

[davecttr]

Apparently even if you have COVID antibodies you can still benefit from a vaccine, even if it just tops up the glass so to speak

[ace2542]

2 hours ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

No it really won't.

 

Millions of young people won't be taking the vaccines as their risks of getting and dying from Covid are so infinitesimally small.   The older, vulnerable demographic are a tiny subset of society.  86% of Covid cases have no symptoms at all and a further percentage only have mild symptoms that don't require treatment or hospitalisation.   99% of people survive Covid. 

 

You're simply not going to be able to justify WW2 style draconian measures on the back of such numbers.   I swear some people would love to see us go back to ID papers and rationing !

 

Then millions of these younger people had better be happy visiting Blackpool then hadn't they?. And it is not that they are not at risk they are just mindless yobs who don't care. 

 

But unless they get the vaccine they can probably forget about going to America or Australia, New Zealand, Canada, maybe even Europe after brexit. Or getting on a plane again or a cruise ship again. That is the carrot or the stick whichever way that pun works that will get the immunity levels to where these different places need it to. Many employers may insist upon it as well.

[zap99]

6 minutes ago, davecttr said:

Apparently even if you have COVID antibodies you can still benefit from a vaccine, even if it just tops up the glass so to speak

Glass only half full?. Top that glass up.😁

[zap99]

2 hours ago, terrierjohn said:

What makes you think that, I would expect they would be very happy to have the jab and to carry an I'd card which includes their vaccination history.

Many younger people are quite accustomed to carrying ID for when they buy there booze and ciggies.