COVID-19: Vaccine/antidote and testing procedures Megathread [Mod Warning - Post #1]

timsey tiger

ShineOn7 wrote: »

All aboard!



https://www.thejournal.ie/freezers-covid-19-vaccine-5286334-Dec2020/

Excuse the Journal link and, as ever, avert your eyes from the comments section

There lies crazy people

They should pay people to take the vaccine. Two weeks after the second shot, here is €300 go out and spend it in a wet pub/ hair dresser. Bit of a kick start to the economy and wouldn't hurt with the uptake either.

iamwhoiam

timsey tiger wrote: »

They should pay people to take the vaccine. Two weeks after the second shot, here is €300 go out and spend it in a wet pub/ hair dresser. Bit of a kick start to the economy and wouldn't hurt with the uptake either.

I would agree with vouchers to spend locally maybe

Ronin247

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Pharma companies have in house legal teams, so it wouldn’t cost them anything extra, or very very little.

Same thing could be said for the insurance industry as well but it doesn't work that way. They are not court legal teams, they are patent and property and that type of legal teams.

ShineOn7

timsey tiger wrote: »

They should pay people to take the vaccine. Two weeks after the second shot, here is €300 go out and spend it in a wet pub/ hair dresser. Bit of a kick start to the economy and wouldn't hurt with the uptake either.

Would one thousand percent work with scroates/Facebook Mammy Hunzos

Shame it'll never happen though

Ten of Swords

Sheep2020 stop trolling the thread and trying to wind up other posters if you wish to keep posting privileges

Hmmzis

lbj666 wrote: »

- Correct me if i am wrong, but wasnt this actually what you call a "rushed vacine" also and it only when through Phase 1 trials and approved because of "exceptional circumstance"
- Something like 1:40,000 reported serious side effects globally mostly europe
- Its the one vacine plucked out as an example out of how many developed in recent history that have had no such issues?

It's not the speed of development, it's the size of trials that prevent one from seeing these oddball rare reactions. If you took 30k people and jabbed half with Pandermix and the other with placebo, what are your chances of detecting that 1 in 40k event related to the vaccine? Would it make a difference if you waited 2-3 months or 2-3 years? The event will manifest itself 2-6 weeks after the injection.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/07/why-pandemic-flu-shot-caused-narcolepsy

It's among the better arricles describing what happened there.

I suspect it's one of the reasons western pharma companies are staying well clear of inactivated whole virus vaccine platforms in general.

Here is a convenient list of the historical issues with vaccines:
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/concerns-history.html

mandrake04

ShineOn7 wrote: »

Would one thousand percent work with scroates/Facebook Mammy Hunzos

Shame it'll never happen though

you could imagine some would have a vaccine every week if that was the case.

iamwhoiam

I hear the Pfizer vaccine can be kept in a normal fridge for 5 days . That will make a huge difference to the distribution

Water John

US saying it will have the vulnerable (100M) vaccinated by the end of Feb.

iamwhoiam

iamwhoiam wrote: »

I hear the Pfizer vaccine can be kept in a normal fridge for 5 days . That will make a huge difference to the distribution

And can be kept in a cold bag, at below 6 degrees Celsius, for 6 hours. So can be couriered around by motorbike, like the blood bikes, which will help distribution in rural areas

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

And can be kept in a cold bag, at below 6 degrees Celsius, for 6 hours. So can be couriered around by motorbike, like the blood bikes, which will help distribution in rural areas

I read earlier that it has to be kept stationary when at fridge temp, so can't be moved around. Apparently that's the reason the UK are now saying care homes might not be first in line.

In other temperature news Moderna are now happy that theirs is stable at fridge temps for 30 days.

Dickie10

i presume we should be well fit to vaccinate all vulnerable by end of jan?

Water John

Deleted User wrote: »

I read earlier that it has to be kept stationary when at fridge temp, so can't be moved around. Apparently that's the reason the UK are now saying care homes might not be first in line.

Surely that's not a major obstacle. The AI technician comes to my farmyard with deep frozen bull semen to inseminate cows.

Water John

Water John wrote: »

Surely that's not a major obstacle. The AI technician comes to my farmyard with deep frozen bull semen to inseminate cows.

I'm not sure, they are seeing if they can split batches to make it easier (each case has 975 doses). Might just be extra cautious, nobody wants to see doses wasted.

mandrake04

Water John wrote: »

Surely that's not a major obstacle. The AI technician comes to my farmyard with deep frozen bull semen to inseminate cows.

Not the same thing, like comparing cabbages and chocolate.

This is the best explanation I seen yet.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=114953843&postcount=3311


Moving it around might not be so good

Water John

Disagree that's the temp he would have in his flask. I understand that it would begin to separate. As you point out though it the number of frozen doses in one batch is the problem.

Don't have a link, but it seems the EU were a bit critical today of the speed at which the UK issued the EUA. Source is NIH Director US Dr. Francis Collins on CNN.

polesheep

mandrake04 wrote: »

you could imagine some would have a vaccine every week if that was the case.

The arrogance and disdain on this thread tonight is both shameful and breathtaking.

polesheep

ShineOn7 wrote: »

Would one thousand percent work with scroates/Facebook Mammy Hunzos

Shame it'll never happen though

I can see that you like to hang out with the big boys but so many of your posts are quite pathetic.

Away With The Fairies

The UK and Northern Ireland are set to start vaccinating next week. Any word yet on when we'll start?

Water John

I'm getting confused with all the sheep on this thread.

Water John

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

The UK and Northern Ireland are set to start vaccinating next week. Any word yet on when we'll start?

Dec 29th is the latest day by which EU approval will be given and may be earlier. Roll out will happen then straight away.

Away With The Fairies

Water John wrote: »

Dec 29th is the latest day by which EU approval will be given and may be earlier. Roll out will happen then straight away.

How are they taking their time making their decision? It seems to be ok for the UK,so how are they so special?

Water John

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

How are they taking their time making their decision? It seems to be ok for the UK,so how are they so special?

The EU has been a bit critical of the haste by which the UK have authorised EUA.
So do you trust the UK Govn't more than the EU?

mandrake04

polesheep wrote: »

The arrogance and disdain on this thread tonight is both shameful and breathtaking.

LOLLLL Disdain...certainly...definitely.

charlie14

Water John wrote: »

Disagree that's the temp he would have in his flask. I understand that it would begin to separate. As you point out though it the number of frozen doses in one batch is the problem.

Don't have a link, but it seems the EU were a bit critical today of the speed at which the UK issued the EUA. Source is NIH Director US Dr. Francis Collins on CNN.

He is using liquid nitrogen which is at -195 Celsius. The batch sizes might be a problem, but at that temperature separation of the vaccine would not be I imagine ?

CIARAN_BOYLE

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

How are they taking their time making their decision? It seems to be ok for the UK,so how are they so special?

Pretty sure the UK got the application earlier too. The europeans got a final application the day before yesterday.

The EMA have criticised the UK approvals process. All but suggesting they rubber stamped it rather than reading it.

I don't think there is a massive public health benefit to approving it now compared to around 29th December. The UK are talking about vaccinating tiny quantities this year.

We might as well get the thing properly approved, not leave gaps for antivax to attack the process and vaccinate in the new year.

Sheep2020

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

I don't think there is a massive public health benefit to approving it now compared to around 29th December. The UK are talking about vaccinating tiny quantities this year.

We might as well get the thing properly approved, not leave gaps for antivax to attack the process and vaccinate in the new year.

No massive health benefit?

How do you figure that?

150,000 people died of Covid in Europe last month

Every extra day they wait, 3000-5000 souls could have been saved

Imagine your family member gets Covid late this month because vaccine wasn't available and godforbid dies

Happy to wait then?

Its just a paper excercise, they are not testing the vaccine in the lab in vitro, they want to show UK up, all about ego, not public health

Gael23

The U.K. are just doing it to be first really

CIARAN_BOYLE

Sheep2020 wrote: »

No massive health benefit?

How do you figure that?

150,000 people died of Covid in Europe last month

Every extra day they wait, 3000-5000 souls could have been saved

Imagine your family member gets Covid late this month because vaccine wasn't available and godforbid dies

Happy to wait then?

Its just a paper excercise, they are not testing the vaccine in the lab in vitro, they want to show UK up, all about ego, not public health

None of my family members would get a vaccine in the first 20,000 or 30,000 doses so it doesnt matter to my family whether its approved now or after christmas. There wouldn't be more than that vaccinated this year.

It doesnt change my opinion that they should thoroughly review the data before approving it.

Not receive the data and approve it the next day (EMA received the data filings 2 days ago).

Gael23

Do we know any more about the idea of sterilising immunity yet?

JTMan

Water John wrote: »

US saying it will have the vulnerable (100M) vaccinated by the end of Feb.

The US said that they would have 100 million vaccinated using the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines by the end of Feb. This stat excludes Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccines which both could produce results by January and get FCA approval by early February. Hence, there could be a lot more than 100 million vaccinated by the end of Feb. (Source).

The crisis in the US should be significantly reduced by March and over by May as the Head of Operation Warp Speed has said.

daydorunrun

JTMan wrote: »

The US said that they would have 100 million vaccinated using the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines by the end of Feb. This stat excludes Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccines which both could produce results by January and get FCA approval by early February. Hence, there could be a lot more than 100 million vaccinated by the end of Feb. (Source).

The crisis in the US should be significantly reduced by March and over by May as the Head of Operation Warp Speed has said.

I wonder what the current view on immunity post infection? If people who have been infected do indeed receive some immunity countries like the US with high infection rates, together with vaccination programmes, I wonder could they perhaps get back to normal quicker than places like Oz, Nz and even ourselves?

carq

Surely the U.K's bullishness is for everyone's benefit?

Sit back and watch the results of their mass vaccine roll out and see how effective it is.
Beats lab testing and trials !

leahyl

Just reading an article on RTE this morning and Dr Margaret Harris from WHO says this "She said the vaccine will be an immune barrier, but it will not stop the transmission for a long time unless we continue with the public health guidelines."

Eh what? How long do we have to continue with masks and social distancing even after we get the vaccine and are protected?? It sounds like it's indefinite from that statement?

odyssey06

leahyl wrote: »

Just reading an article on RTE this morning and Dr Margaret Harris from WHO says this "She said the vaccine will be an immune barrier, but it will not stop the transmission for a long time unless we continue with the public health guidelines."
Eh what? How long do we have to continue with masks and social distancing even after we get the vaccine and are protected?? It sounds like it's indefinite from that statement?

I would assume the 'long time' is the time for enough people to be vaccinated to reach herd immunity \ block community transmission.

leahyl

odyssey06 wrote: »

I would assume the 'long time' is the time for enough people to be vaccinated to reach herd immunity \ block community transmission.

Ok thanks.....whenever that will be! Hopefully sometime in May/June....

drunkmonkey

If a vaccine is 95%/100% effective, why is it necessary to have 70% of the population vaccinated, surely the at risk and anyone else that wants it is enough.

What Username Guidelines

drunkmonkey wrote: »

If a vaccine is 95%/100% effective, why is it necessary to have 70% of the population vaccinated, surely the at risk and anyone else that wants it is enough.

Not everyone else that wants it can get it. By hitting 70% threshold, it becomes very difficult and far less likely to run into someone who is infectious.

ixoy

odyssey06 wrote: »

I would assume the 'long time' is the time for enough people to be vaccinated to reach herd immunity \ block community transmission.

Yep. It's to stop people who do get vaccinated from becoming too complacent and risk infecting those yet to be vaccinated until we reach a certain threshold that will cover enough that those can't be vaccinated are protected.

lbj666

leahyl wrote: »

Ok thanks.....whenever that will be! Hopefully sometime in May/June....

Herd immunity isnt going to happen over night once say 60%-70% of the population are vacinated.

dominatinMC

leahyl wrote: »

Just reading an article on RTE this morning...

Well, that's your first problem right there! :pac:

iguana

drunkmonkey wrote: »

If a vaccine is 95%/100% effective, why is it necessary to have 70% of the population vaccinated, surely the at risk and anyone else that wants it is enough.

Why does it feel like the same handful of posters are constantly asking the same questions every few days and ignoring the answers?

dominatinMC

Gael23 wrote: »

The U.K. are just doing it to be first really

And I would say more power to them. There is a lot of cynicism and skepticism - even condescension - exhibitied by our media towards the UK government. Some are implying there was political will to get this approval over the line first but, ultimately, we have to trust the integrity of the UK regulators, and assume they did their job.
In any case, I just hope our media will be as critical when our government and HSE combine to make a complete balls of our vaccination program - which deep down, we all know will happen!

lbj666

dominatinMC wrote: »

And I would say more power to them. There is a lot of cynicism and skepticism - even condescension - exhibitied by our media towards the UK government. Some are implying there was political will to get this approval over the line first but, ultimately, we have to trust the integrity of the UK regulators, and assume they did their job.
In any case, I just hope our media will be as critical when our government and HSE combine to make a complete balls of our vaccination program - which deep down, we all know will happen!

Yet senior members of parliament were claiming they got this through faster cause of brexit, when in fact it was approved was that it would still be covered under EU law which they would no longer be covered by beyond january 1st.


Its hard not to be a bit cynical

leahyl

dominatinMC wrote: »

Well, that's your first problem right there! :pac:

You know, I anticipated an answer like that before I posted it :pac:

Marhay70

What the UK has approved is exactly the same product as the EU is being asked to approve. If it takes the EU another month to come to the same conclusion as the UK, and in the meantime tens of thousands more people die, that's going to take a lot of explaining. We have been encouraged all along to trust the science, and by and large we have, so why all of a sudden are we so reticent?
What will be the excuse? They can't really say the UK regulators are not up to scratch because that is patently untrue so what else is there to say?

conor_mc

Marhay70 wrote: »

What the UK has approved is exactly the same product as the EU is being asked to approve. If it takes the EU another month to come to the same conclusion as the UK, and in the meantime tens of thousands more people die, that's going to take a lot of explaining. We have been encouraged all along to trust the science, and by and large we have, so why all of a sudden are we so reticent?
What will be the excuse? They can't really say the UK regulators are not up to scratch because that is patently untrue so what else is there to say?

You could’ve argued the same about the FAA until 737-Max aircraft started falling out of the sky.

Turns out the FAA were not up to scratch, so do your own diligence!

It’s hard not to suspect the UK approval has had some political interference, i.e. good news to distract from the political cliff edge that is Brexit. I’d hope not, but....

Sheep2020

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

None of my family members would get a vaccine in the first 20,000 or 30,000 doses so it doesnt matter to my family whether its approved now or after christmas. There wouldn't be more than that vaccinated this year.

It doesnt change my opinion that they should thoroughly review the data before approving it.

Not receive the data and approve it the next day (EMA received the data filings 2 days ago).

Let's be real here the EU are not going to reject the Pfizer vaccine, it's 100% going to be approved, they will find nothing to reject it or delay it, Pfizer will have tripled checked everything.

EU are just wasting valuable time right now

Many many vulnerable are going to meet people over Christmas holiday's, alot are going to get infected, alot are going to die over this time wasting excercise

is_that_so

Sheep2020 wrote: »

Let's be real here the EU are not going to reject the Pfizer vaccine, it's 100% going to be approved, they will find nothing to reject it or delay it, Pfizer will have tripled checked everything.

EU are just wasting valuable time right now

Many many vulnerable are going to meet people over Christmas holiday's, a lot are going to get infected, a lot are going to die over this time wasting excercise

Any numbers on a lot?