When will this shit end?

[gizmoman]

33 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

Can you imagine if this reduces deaths and hospitalisations now after all this....

It will, but the vaccine will be getting rolled out then so any improvement will be put down to that. They knew (or should have known) 6 months ago about this, I did and I'm no doctor!

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.24.20075838v1

This was published back in April, it may only be a small study but the results were clear and were verified by other work, even if they didn't think it was proof positive of a link there was zero risk in advising people to take Vitamin D supplements (or even just telling them to get out in the sun during the summer). As recently as September Hancock was resisting giving people Vitamin D he claimed in parliament it had no effect despite loads of evidence by then.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/hancock-wrong-to-say-government-scientists-ran-coronavirus-trial-on-vitamin-d-m6h5tjq36

You have to ask just how qualified the people advising the government are when a low cost risk free benefit is ignored for months during what they constantly tell us is a national emergency. Even if it is only marginally effective it could have saved some lives.

[Toilet Duck]

23 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

What does your gut say on the sterilising effect? Do you think it will be effective in reducing infections?

My gut tells me it will have some effect but not 90% sterilising immunity, but stranger things have happened! If it reduces symptomatic disease by 90% it would be a game changer in and of itself (the flu vaccine has a big impact on how we manage things and some years the flu shot is actually not bad at reducing infections, biology is just a bit of a black box sometimes!...talk today is of measles vaccine levels of sterilisation though, if that's real, then it's a big deal). Irrespective of whether the mink thing comes to anything, we've seen that it can jump back into animal reservoirs pretty handily, so I'd expect it to be with us in some shape or form from now on, it's just too widespread, but while we start down the road of ending how it impacts on our daily lives, we really are still at the beginning of understanding the biology of this virus, so who knows, we may not see this one again, but we'll see part of it in some other one that jumps out of a different animal in the future (we've had 3 CoV outbreaks in the last 20 years, so I don't think we are done with them yet). What we have learned though is that the rapid vaccine development platforms that have been developed over the last few years really are something (and bode well for how we deal with other emerging threats).

[Leyrulion]

7 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

bode well for how we deal with other emerging threats).

I was talking about this today. Isn't the proof that this method works (seemingly well) such an enormous step forward for medical science generally.

The fact that it can be adapted fairly easily shows that in the next decade we could be developing vaccines for diseases that we would have said was impossible or unfeasible 12 months ago.

[Toilet Duck]

5 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

It will, but the vaccine will be getting rolled out then so any improvement will be put down to that. They knew (or should have known) 6 months ago about this, I did and I'm no doctor!

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.24.20075838v1

This was published back in April, it may only be a small study but the results were clear and were verified by other work, even if they didn't think it was proof positive of a link there was zero risk in advising people to take Vitamin D supplements (or even just telling them to get out in the sun during the summer). As recently as September Hancock was resisting giving people Vitamin D he claimed in parliament it had no effect despite loads of evidence by then.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/hancock-wrong-to-say-government-scientists-ran-coronavirus-trial-on-vitamin-d-m6h5tjq36

You have to ask just how qualified the people advising the government are when a low cost risk free benefit is ignored for months during what they constantly tell us is a national emergency. Even if it is only marginally effective it could have saved some lives.

Howdy Gizmo,

The problem is drawing conclusions from correlation. Correcting an insufficient is not the same as saying taking vitamin D is protective. The scientific community absolutely noted that vitamin D deficiency was correlated with those who had severe disease and started a large number of trials to assess this (go to clinicaltrials.gov and type in COVID under disease or condition and vitamin D in other terms...there's 60 different trials listed). I would be absolutely delighted if it turns out to work (I've published a couple of papers myself on vitamin D and the vitamin D receptor in breast cancer, so I have no problem with cheap solutions). But, like every other remedy, it needs to be tested properly. Most of the trials showing some evidence of an effect are using high dose calcitriol rather than over the counter vitamin D preparations, so whether you need a high dose of the active form or whether some supplements will do the job remains an unanswered question (though those trials are now ongoing). But here's no conspiracy to suppress a cheap remedy (dexamethasone was show to work, cheap as chips and around for ages, but it was shown via a trial). I do get the idea that it should be safe to try even if it doesn't work, however, many of the people who might benefit from it are also taking other things and vitamin D interacts with them (statins for example), so it's not as simple as just telling everyone to take it. 

[Toilet Duck]

2 minutes ago, Leyrulion said:

I was talking about this today. Isn't the proof that this method works (seemingly well) such an enormous step forward for medical science generally.

The fact that it can be adapted fairly easily shows that in the next decade we could be developing vaccines for diseases that we would have said was impossible or unfeasible 12 months ago.

Yeah, it's the first real time demonstration of this. The prospects for cancer vaccines are phenomenal...coupled with some of the emerging nanomedicine delivery techniques, there should be some next generation vaccines emerging big time over the next decade. 

[stuartbert two hats]

Another question, @Toilet Duck. Since this vaccine is using a totally different mechanism, is it less likely to have the mild fever/couple of days of feeling a little off that the Oxford vaccine has?

[Toilet Duck]

29 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Another question, @Toilet Duck. Since this vaccine is using a totally different mechanism, is it less likely to have the mild fever/couple of days of feeling a little off that the Oxford vaccine has?

Probably. These things are our immune system kicking in, irrespective of how we jump start it, the feeling is the same! But different people have different immune systems and the different vaccines might work a bit differently in each of us. I got my flu shot on Saturday. Nothing. Nada. No pain in my arm, no redness, didn't feel anything at all. Other years, my arm has felt like someone punched me, some years I've been wrecked in the afternoon after getting it, it just varies. No significant side effects have been noted so far in 43000 people though with this one, so it sounds pretty good!

 

Edit: Though I did get a Star Wars plaster this year, so maybe it was that! (it was actually the kids clinic in work). 

Edit again: Sorry, reading that back it looks like I'm saying it's probably less likely, what I mean is we'll probably get the same mild side effects!

Edited November 10, 2020 by Toilet Duck

[gizmoman]

15 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

Howdy Gizmo,

The problem is drawing conclusions from correlation. Correcting an insufficient is not the same as saying taking vitamin D is protective. The scientific community absolutely noted that vitamin D deficiency was correlated with those who had severe disease and started a large number of trials to assess this (go to clinicaltrials.gov and type in COVID under disease or condition and vitamin D in other terms...there's 60 different trials listed). I would be absolutely delighted if it turns out to work (I've published a couple of papers myself on vitamin D and the vitamin D receptor in breast cancer, so I have no problem with cheap solutions). But, like every other remedy, it needs to be tested properly. Most of the trials showing some evidence of an effect are using high dose calcitriol rather than over the counter vitamin D preparations, so whether you need a high dose of the active form or whether some supplements will do the job remains an unanswered question (though those trials are now ongoing). But here's no conspiracy to suppress a cheap remedy (dexamethasone was show to work, cheap as chips and around for ages, but it was shown via a trial). I do get the idea that it should be safe to try even if it doesn't work, however, many of the people who might benefit from it are also taking other things and vitamin D interacts with them (statins for example), so it's not as simple as just telling everyone to take it. 

You have to wonder why Matt Hancock was so negative in his response to the question in parliament, he could have made the points you just made but  he came out with a blatant lie instead. Agree supplements are not the ideal way to increase Vit D levels, sunlight is far preferable and even cheaper! They could have told people to get more sun during the summer, no good now though! Bottom line is though they ARE now telling people to take it, statins or not, but I take your point that if they had done it sooner without more evidence and there were problems that would come back at them.

[Zoo Music Girl]

4 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

You have to wonder why Matt Hancock was so negative in his response to the question in parliament, he could have made the points you just made but  he came out with a blatant lie instead. Agree supplements are not the ideal way to increase Vit D levels, sunlight is far preferable and even cheaper! They could have told people to get more sun during the summer, no good now though! Bottom line is though they ARE now telling people to take it, statins or not, but I take your point that if they had done it sooner without more evidence and there were problems that would come back at them.

Because Matt Hancock is a fucking idiot.

[Toilet Duck]

1 minute ago, gizmoman said:

You have to wonder why Matt Hancock was so negative in his response to the question in parliament, he could have made the points you just made but  he came out with a blatant lie instead. Agree supplements are not the ideal way to increase Vit D levels, sunlight is far preferable and even cheaper! They could have told people to get more sun during the summer, no good now though! Bottom line is though they ARE now telling people to take it, statins or not, but I take your point that if they had done it sooner without more evidence and there were problems that would come back at them.

I think part of the problem is that the Tories have made a bit of a mess of things, so they are super defensive about everything. They also don't seem to like giving a straight answer to anything (or they actually don't fully understand what they are told by the experts that advise them, which is entirely possible!). As a result, they seem to lie almost as a reflex, then backtrack. Based on the fact that the risks outdoors are significantly lower, encouraging people to be out during the summer (but not in large groups) would have been pretty sensible (in practice, it's what most people have been doing, I know we saw pictures of packed beaches when the weather was hot, but most people were sensible enough I think...I don't know really, I can only judge by what I see around me, and things have been handled a bit differently here, but the idiots are definitely in the (vocal) minority).  

[zahidf]

 

[Avalon_Fields]

I like this: Sir John Bell, a member of the Government’s vaccine task force, said he could say “with some confidence” that Britain could return to normal life by spring.

[squirrelarmy]

7 hours ago, Toilet Duck said:

Though I did get a Star Wars plaster this year, so maybe it was that

If we’re getting Star Wars plasters then definitely sign me up for the vaccine. 

[Ryan1984]

Matt Hancock (the Cousin Greg of the Tory government!) is on the news looking proud of himself about the potential vaccine but urging caution/telling people to continue to follow the rules. I think they need to continue down this route as people will think it’s over (if they don’t already).

He also just called the current restrictions a “lockdown”. Sacked by Cummings in the morning?

[steviewevie]

I guess next row will be about who's getting a vaccine and who isn't.

[Ryan1984]

Sir John Bell on BBC News alert.

[phimill]

41 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I guess next row will be about who's getting a vaccine and who isn't.

I have just done some very quick sums and I see that it should be rolled out as follows:

1st Set to include all NHS/Care workers (approx 3million), 2nd set to include all teachers and support staff (approx 750k)

We should have enough Pfizer to cover all "key workers and over 60s" - including nearly all NHS and 80+ by Christmas (if we get the 10m doses)

Then when the OxAZ comes on board this can be more widely rolled out in 15yr groups - probably 1 set per qtr, so vaccinations complete to 15+ by autumn.

With under 15s getting an aerosol version if one is available. Matt Hancock said on BBC this morning that current vaccination plan is for adults only.

From the orders we know about we have enough on order to cover everyone (based on 2 doses of each vaccine) 

Edited November 10, 2020 by phimill

[eFestivals]

14 minutes ago, phimill said:

From the orders we know about we have enough on order to cover everyone (based on 2 doses of each vaccine) 

it's not the having it on order which will count, but when it gets delivered.

We might jump to the front of the queue for the batches produced before approval, but after that we're likely to come under strong pressure to become part of a 'fair' worldwide distribution.

 

[Fuzzy Afro]

5 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

it's not the having it on order which will count, but when it gets delivered.

We might jump to the front of the queue for the batches produced before approval, but after that we're likely to come under strong pressure to become part of a 'fair' worldwide distribution.

 

You’d hope that the pre order ones alone are enough to cover the people that need to be vaccinated in order to cause a big time relaxation of the rules. If healthy people under 60 are not vaccinated, hopefully that shouldn’t be a deal breaker for getting back to a much more normal position. 

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

You’d hope that the pre order ones alone are enough to cover the people that need to be vaccinated in order to cause a big time relaxation of the rules.

the pre-orders might cover it, but what's available of the vaccine by the end of the year will be a very long way short of meeting all of the pre-orders.

[JoeyT]

There's been talk of timeframes in regards to the vaccine.

So it's 3 weeks between the two doses and then 2 weeks from the second dose until you're considered good to go.

With that in mind I wonder when we are looking at the first relaxation of any social distancing rules?

Late feb / early March?

[Mr.Tease]

What an absolute lying wally...

 

[whitehorses]

5 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

There's been talk of timeframes in regards to the vaccine.

So it's 3 weeks between the two doses and then 2 weeks from the second dose until you're considered good to go.

With that in mind I wonder when we are looking at the first relaxation of any social distancing rules?

Late feb / early March?

I suppose that depends on whether this ‘wave’ follows the pattern of the first. If it does, and the current measures ‘work’, then infections will be significantly lower dec/Jan meaning distancing may be eased for a few months (a la July/Aug) before its time for us all to get injected 💉

[Zoo Music Girl]

A couple of questions, for @Toilet Duckmainly...

Has anything been said about how long they expect the vaccine to last? Or is that impossible to know yet? Just wondering if the expectation is, like the flu jab, people have to have it ever winter.

Do you know much about the China vaccine? Was it rushed through to this phase of trials? Just seen they've stopped the trial in Brazil due to a serious adverse effect and loads of people have already had it.

[Fuzzy Afro]