Jump to content

Don't Miss a Beat

Join the UK's most passionate festival community. Keep up with the latest conversations, line-up rumours, and music news.

250,000+ Members

Connect with a massive network of fellow festival-goers.

Lively Discussions

Thousands of active topics on music, campsites, and tips.

Hot Rumours & News

Hear about secret sets and lineup drops before anyone else.

Create Free Account
OR
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎

When will this shit end?


Chrisp1986

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, zahidf said:

People will start household mixing once deaths and hospitalisations are down. So other restrictions are pointless IMO

There is a way to allow household mixing but keep it controlled - it’s basically what they were initially proposing at Christmas - let people have exclusive bubbles of say 12 people or three households or something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, zahidf said:

FT news on Oxford vaccine. Approval due on Tuesday and they are considering Tony Blair plan

 

If the research has been based on 2 doses, and also half a dose followed by a full dose 28 days later, it's just daft to throw that out the window and just do 1 dose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

There is a way to allow household mixing but keep it controlled - it’s basically what they were initially proposing at Christmas - let people have exclusive bubbles of say 12 people or three households or something like that.

But people won't even follow that once deaths and hosptialisations are down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

If the research has been based on 2 doses, and also half a dose followed by a full dose 28 days later, it's just daft to throw that out the window and just do 1 dose

What if it's not? The Pfizer data strongly suggests immunity kicks in on one dose, even if it doesn't have anything to say about maintaining it.

 

 

20201227_195220.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, zahidf said:

Well then there is some evidence base to them looking at the one dose suggestion. FT is reliable with these things 

None has been published. The MHRA work on statistically sound evidence based medicine. That's why phase 3 trials involve 10,000s of people.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

What if it's not? The Pfizer data strongly suggests immunity kicks in on one dose, even if it doesn't have anything to say about maintaining it.

 

 

20201227_195220.jpg

The PM vaccine is radically different to the AZ and it would be unwise to make a comparison. Undoubtedly some degree of immunity kicks in after dose 1 but it's not been quantified to a proper scientific conclusion.

If we consider PB v AZ, the former is a purer solution as the mRMA codes only for the virus protein spike whereas the AZ adenovirus contains the protein spike gene amongst many others. It like using a pure chemical compared to a dilute solution.

 

Edited by Lycra
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lycra said:

None has been published. The MHRA work on statistically sound evidence based medicine. That's why phase 3 trials involve 10,000s of people.  

Let's see what's happens on Tuesday. There has been more evidence submitted to the MHRA. I didn't think it likely with one dose at first, but the FT is a reliable source, so there must be something they are looking at 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Let's see what's happens on Tuesday. There has been more evidence submitted to the MHRA. I didn't think it likely with one dose at first, but the FT is a reliable source, so there must be something they are looking at 

Personally I think we've had a lot of political spin put out by government over the last 24hrs to get us all feeling good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Lycra said:

Personally I think we've had a lot of political spin put out by government over the last 24hrs to get us all feeling good.

That's not a bad thing when it comes to vaccines. Too doom laden and people will just give up. Some hope and people will follow more to give time for vaccinations.

Anyway, FT says its MHRA source rather than a govt one 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

What if it's not? The Pfizer data strongly suggests immunity kicks in on one dose, even if it doesn't have anything to say about maintaining it.

 

 

20201227_195220.jpg

Pfizer is an entirely different type of vaccine - but more importantly, that Pfizer data doesn't provide any indication as to what happens after X (in their case 21, in the case of Oxford 28) days without the second dose - the protection might fade away. I don't think that's being alarmist - that's literally one of the reasons many other vaccines are delivered as 2 dose shots.

It's worth remembering that Oxford originally started one of their early trials as a one-dose regiment, then converted it to a two dose when the data came in so clearly they believe there's a substantial a benefit to the second dose. Plus if the the new data still suggests a 1.5 dose regiment is the most effective option, then relying on that first half dose would be a non starter.

As pointed out - the only way the MHRA/JCVI can or would approve the one dose idea is if they've got enough solid evidence - so far what we've seen doesn't come anywhere even close to that. Ultimately we've just got to see what new data is released - but if it does look like that Pfizer data, that shouldn't be anywhere near enough to approve a 1 dose regiment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So my housemate went to his parents ( in same town ) for Xmas and now his stepdad has tested positive. 

It's pretty obvious to me how all this was gonna play out. Just sucks cause I spent Xmas alone to minimize risk n it doesn't even matter. 

Stay safe out there!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Latest Activity

    • Restore getting more than Lib Dems is not good.
    • https://x.com/amirtibon/status/2083054470871535853   Some thoughts on the Gaza agreement announced overnight, which despite my reservations and concerns, I hope will be implemented. 1. Donald Trump is trying to collect "wins" and "achievements" ahead of the midterm elections. His party is entering that election at a disadvantage, but because Democrats may choose weak and unpopular candidates in specific states, much like Republicans did in 2022, there's a reason for Trump to at least try achieving a surprising result like the one Biden secured four years ago.   2. The will to provide Trump such a "win" was an important motivation for all sides involved in this agreement: Hamas, Netanyahu, Qatar, Egypt, UAE and Turkey. All of them hope, each for their own reasons, that the transactional president will remember their role in the agreement and the positive media coverage it has generated and will continue to generate. You can like it or not, but that's the nature of diplomacy, especially in the Middle East, under Trump.   3. Netanyahu and his band of liars in the Israeli media (and the last few suckers in the American media still buying his spin) are already trying to oversell the agreement and present it in terms that contradict the Board of Peace statements and briefings. Of course, the October 7 Prime Minister can't just say the truth on this one, which goes something like: "I'm trying to stay on good terms with Trump ahead of an election here in Israel that will determine my personal fate and whether or not I go to jail in 2027."   4. For Hamas, the agreement is a way to buy time and survive, which is basically the organization's overarching goal since October 7. They lost most of their leadership and thousands of their fighters; they will also, I believe, give up some of their weapons to the new Gaza-based Palestinian government, which is a good thing. But at the bottom of all their decisions is a simple calculation: being able to say, "we committed the most deadly and humiliating attack against Israel since the start of the conflict, and survived as a movement and an organization to tell about it."   5. Hamas was able to say that yesterday, before the agreement was signed, and it can also say that today, after the conclusion of the negotiations. So in that regard, the agreement is preferable to the murky post-war reality that preceded it, in which Hamas was recruiting again thousands of young fighters, holding on to all its weapons, and controlling 99% of Gaza's population, making money off people buying fuel and cigarettes. Changing even a part of that terrible reality, by collecting some of the weapons and allowing progress on reconstruction under a non-Hamas government, is better. It means coming to terms with the fact that Israel under this government failed to dismantle Hamas and allowed its survival even before this agreement was signed.   6. Do I think the agreement will be fully implemented over the next 300 days, as I understand the timeline? I'm highly skeptical. But I'm also asking: what are the alternatives? Netanyahu, in his quest for political survival at all costs, ignored David Ben-Gurion's national security strategy of seeking short and decisive wars, which was based on Israel's unique internal and external challenges that make it dangerous for this country to have long wars of attrition. The result is an Israel that is hated, isolated and denounced around the world like never before, and is totally reliant on the support of one man (TRUMP) to avoid crushing international sanctions. Going to war in Gaza once again based on the same promise of "finishing Hamas," which this government failed to achieve after three long years, would have been suicidal unless Trump promised his full backing. And Trump, for good reasons, can't give such a commitment after his bitter experience with Netanyahu in Iran and Lebanon.   7. For me and my family, these are all very personal, not only political, questions. My six-year-old daughter will start school on the Gaza border in exactly one month, as we rebuild our life in the same home where Hamas tried to murder us on October 7. We've learned over the years to be highly skeptical of premature victory announcements and diplomatic celebrations. When these things collapse under the cynical realities of the conflict, most of those announcing them are not around to face the consequences. Still, I don't see a better alternative to the 20-Point Plan that Trump presented last year, at least not with Israel's current position of isolation and exhaustion under this government. So I have some hope that the agreement will succeed, even partially, and deliver a period of quiet. For us on the border, that would be significant after three years of war and trauma. And maybe in the long run, with different Israeli and Palestinian leadership, this will become a first step in a broader positive change for the region.
    • Until they're through the first round of votes there's no point believing any reports about who'll win.
    • David Byrne’s obviously got a few hits to play, but he’s not cheesy enough for the Legend Slot. Other headliner perhaps?
    • Too good for the legends slot 
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...