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

5 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

I'm not convinced, unless they're sat on data that's not been published yet (I genuinely hope they are) - see how cautious Pfizer are at the notion of their vaccine being used in this way:

 

Pfizer/BioNTech said that their vaccine was not designed to be used in two shots 12 weeks apart. In a statement, the firms said there was no evidence the first shot continued to work beyond three weeks.

“Data from the phase 3 study demonstrated that, although partial protection from the vaccine appears to begin as early as 12 days after the first dose, two doses of the vaccine are required to provide the maximum protection against the disease, a vaccine efficacy of 95%. There are no data to demonstrate that protection after the first dose is sustained after 21 days,” they said.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/dec/30/oxford-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine-approved-by-uk-regulator

It's pretty risky to do this for the Pfizer vaccine too. The UK Government is essentially trialling this schedule for them as part of the rollout.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

I'm not convinced, unless they're sat on data that's not been published yet (I genuinely hope they are) - see how cautious Pfizer are at the notion of their vaccine being used in this way:

 

Pfizer/BioNTech said that their vaccine was not designed to be used in two shots 12 weeks apart. In a statement, the firms said there was no evidence the first shot continued to work beyond three weeks.

“Data from the phase 3 study demonstrated that, although partial protection from the vaccine appears to begin as early as 12 days after the first dose, two doses of the vaccine are required to provide the maximum protection against the disease, a vaccine efficacy of 95%. There are no data to demonstrate that protection after the first dose is sustained after 21 days,” they said.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/dec/30/oxford-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine-approved-by-uk-regulator

Pfizer don’t have this data, so they are right to stick with what they know. AZ on the other hand had people with significant gaps between doses in their trials (for various reasons) and when they looked at infections in those with the longer gap, they saw that they were still significantly protected, even maintaining the 100% protection from severe disease once they passed 10 days from dose 1 administration. They also looked at the amount of antibodies to the spike protein in people with different gaps between doses, and lo and behold, antibody levels increased with the longer gap (they don’t have data past 12 weeks, hence, that’s where they have put the cutoff for dose 2...it might actually be fine to do it 6 months later, we just don’t know yet...could even be fine to do it later with a different vaccine, don’t know that yet either too!)...I hadn’t seen this data til today but @stuartbert two hats posted a link to the approval and it had these details in it. 

Edited by Toilet Duck
Typos!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

It's pretty risky to do this for the Pfizer vaccine too. The UK Government is essentially trialling this schedule for them as part of the rollout.

 

I suppose they have evidence of the immune system behaving in a particular way with the AZ vaccine and given the initial response is similar for both vaccines, they can extrapolate that they will both produce a similar result over the 12 week timeframe - but that's not the same as empirical evidence. Uncharted territory here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jack.194 said:

Why the fuck have they not closed schools, seriously?

Also, how can a government that have cut education to its core, pushed forward with austerity, and consistently voted against free school meals for the last TEN YEARS genuinely claim that they’re keeping schools open to ‘limit the inequality that shutting schools would cause.’

I’m absolutely beyond fuming. Not only that but it’s FIVE DAYS until most schools go back now!! I spoke to my headteacher yesterday and she said she hadn’t heard a thing from the gov/LA about testing, opening etc etc. And to top it all off, I still don’t really know where my schools stands as it’s a SEN school, they didn’t mention us once in that speech Gavin made.

I was really hoping for ~a month full national long lockdown, push forward with vaccines, and then things might’ve been looking up.

Sorry to rant, I’ve tweeted all I can but I’m still really feeling it.

My two kids secondary school has pushed back the start to 18th Jan 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

Pfizer don’t have this data, so they are right to stick with what they know. AZ on the other hand had people with significant gaps between doses in their trials (for various reasons) and when they looked at infections in those with the longer gap, they saw that they were still significantly protected, even maintaining the 100% protection from severe disease once they passed 10 days from dose 1 administration. They also looked at the amount of antibodies to the spike protein in people with different gaps between doses, and lo and behold, antibody levels increased with the longer gap (they don’t have data past 12 weeks, hence, that’s where they have out the cutoff for dose 2...it might actually be fine to do it 6 months later, we just don’t know yet...could even be fine to do it later with a different vaccine, don’t know that yet either too!)...I hadn’t seen this data til today but @stuartbert two hats posted a link to the approval and it had these details in it. 

I know this has been said many times but thank you for your posts in this thread, it makes the whole thing a long easier to understand for us mere simpletons 🙂 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, ShakeyCrash said:

This is where it becomes interesting. The numbers will come down but how much would this be offset by those 65-80 if things opened up?  Of that population what % are hospitalized if they get covid and how many are them are in terms of millions. Then you can get a decent worst case scenario if you repeat the approach across all groups right. This is using the obvious incorrect assumption that everyone will get (which they won’t).

So the vaccines have had no cases of hospitalisation (as far as I know) after the first dose has taken effect. If you look at 60-79 they make up 38% of deaths in England and roughly totals another 5.6 million. So there's about 10 million people in the 60+ age who make up 91% of deaths. If we take the government at their word they'd have all been offered one dose of either vaccine by 7th Feb. 

So mortality could well be significantly lower by end of Feb, as you and I think @Toilet DuckDuck mentioned it's a question of morbidity and what impact that will have on hospitals. Even if deaths are low we won't be getting many restrictions lifted if hospitals are still rammed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Leyrulion said:

So the vaccines have had no cases of hospitalisation (as far as I know) after the first dose has taken effect. If you look at 60-79 they make up 38% of deaths in England and roughly totals another 5.6 million. So there's about 10 million people in the 60+ age who make up 91% of deaths. If we take the government at their word they'd have all been offered one dose of either vaccine by 7th Feb. 

So mortality could well be significantly lower by end of Feb, as you and I think @Toilet DuckDuck mentioned it's a question of morbidity and what impact that will have on hospitals. Even if deaths are low we won't be getting many restrictions lifted if hospitals are still rammed. 

In theory the NHS workers are also going to be offered the vaccine from next week. (Regardless of age). So that SHOULD help with stuff as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, DareToDibble said:

I know this has been said many times but thank you for your posts in this thread, it makes the whole thing a long easier to understand for us mere simpletons 🙂 

No worries! There’s loads of great posters in this thread though, probably the sanest place on the internet I’ve come across to discuss it! (I haven’t been tempted to jump in anywhere else!)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Toilet Duck said:

No worries! There’s loads of great posters in this thread though, probably the sanest place on the internet I’ve come across to discuss it! (I haven’t been tempted to jump in anywhere else!)...

Don’t. I’ve made the mistake of reading comments section during this pandemic on various websites and deer god i can’t unsee what I’ve read. The horror!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, swede said:

My two kids secondary school has pushed back the start to 18th Jan 

Yea the guidance for secondary schools isn’t necessarily the confusing part. But when you get into the intricacies of different schools, it gets confusing pretty quickly - and Mr Williamson did f*** all to help

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Jack.194 said:

Yea the guidance for secondary schools isn’t necessarily the confusing part. But when you get into the intricacies of different schools, it gets confusing pretty quickly - and Mr Williamson did f*** all to help

That seems to be an all too common occurrence with Williamson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There seems to be a big drive in the medical world to make people aware that if you picked up COVID at Christmas then you’ll be at a really contagious stage at NY. Hopefully the message works and households don’t mix up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, kalifire said:

Meanwhile in Melbourne, after 60 days of no locally transmitted cases, yesterday we had three. Private gatherings have immediately been halved to 15 from 5pm today (NYE) and masks are mandatory indoors everywhere. 

Sigh. 

Ah bollocks ... unlike here it will and does get shut down quickly ... all the best with whatever measures they decide to take 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, kalifire said:

Meanwhile in Melbourne, after 60 days of no locally transmitted cases, yesterday we had three. Private gatherings have immediately been halved to 15 from 5pm today (NYE) and masks are mandatory indoors everywhere. 

Sigh. 

I think I’d give my left bollock to be allowed a private gathering of 15. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Toilet Duck said:

No worries! There’s loads of great posters in this thread though, probably the sanest place on the internet I’ve come across to discuss it! (I haven’t been tempted to jump in anywhere else!)...

Every now and then I make the mistake of looking at the replies to a Tweet about, say, the vaccines. (stop it! With a small 'v') Fucking hell. Very quickly come running back here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, kalifire said:

Meanwhile in Melbourne, after 60 days of no locally transmitted cases, yesterday we had three. Private gatherings have immediately been halved to 15 from 5pm today (NYE) and masks are mandatory indoors everywhere. 

Sigh. 

yeah, but at least it's nice and warm there (or maybe stupidly hot).

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...