When will this shit end?

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

was it widespread in China at that stage, or still mainly concentrated in Wuhan?

According to the doc it was present in all major cities and then they still let their mass migration event happen before they eventually locked down.

[stuartbert two hats]

7 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

100k deaths on all the front pages...so there you go...

I misjudged our press. They exceeded my expectations.

[steviewevie]

 

[Crazyfool01]

12 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

100k deaths on all the front pages...so there you go...

Too late to take up the bet ?!! 

[steviewevie]

8 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

According to the doc it was present in all major cities and then they still let their mass migration event happen before they eventually locked down.

mostly still in Wuhan at that point, only Wuhan went into lockdown.

[Ozanne]

 

[xxialac]

39 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

 

Bottled it? Of course they have!

[zahidf]

27 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

 

 

they better hope their 'source' is right or they might as well close their paper for good. Making those claims without the data to hand is VERY dodgy

 

[Paul ™]

3 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Bottled it? Of course they have!

Of course they would 

[zahidf]

FT lays into the EU

[tigger123]

Expect nothing less from the Daily Mail, but still shocking them to have a chart showing the top 20 countries with the highest death toll, and to see 'Africa' listed as a country 😠😠

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9190253/Boris-begins-work-roadmap-lockdown-PM-hopes-present-plan-nation-mid-February.html

 

Edited January 26, 2021 by tigger123

[zahidf]

 

[xxialac]

Just now, zahidf said:

 

Superb!!

[xxialac]

Today we announce we are going to protect our citizens by quarantining passengers from all countries  a couple of countries at the time we needed to months after we needed to (disclaimer: these urgent measures not to take effect for some time, as we’ve only just thought of it).

BOZO: We've done everything we could have done...

[zahidf]

LOOK AT HIS SAD LITTLE FACE. ISNT HE THE REAL VICTIM?

 

[xxialac]

4 minutes ago, zahidf said:

LOOK AT HIS SAD LITTLE FACE. ISNT HE THE REAL VICTIM?

 

Not finding your 'Operation Last Gasp' joke funny any more?

[efcfanwirral]

31 minutes ago, tigger123 said:

Expect nothing less from the Daily Mail, but still shocking them to have a chart showing the top 20 countries with the highest death toll, and to see 'Africa' listed as a country 😠😠

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9190253/Boris-begins-work-roadmap-lockdown-PM-hopes-present-plan-nation-mid-February.html

 

Relative to population size would be good. Its crazy that we have a quarter of America's deaths (the most comparable of the ones above from a health service and wealth perspective) 

And more than half of India?? 

Edited January 26, 2021 by efcfanwirral

[Zoo Music Girl]

31 minutes ago, tigger123 said:

Expect nothing less from the Daily Mail, but still shocking them to have a chart showing the top 20 countries with the highest death toll, and to see 'Africa' listed as a country 😠😠

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9190253/Boris-begins-work-roadmap-lockdown-PM-hopes-present-plan-nation-mid-February.html

 

That is fucking appalling.

[xxialac]

A hotel quarantine system targeted at arrivals from high-risk countries will be announced by the home secretary, Priti Patel, on Wednesday, after ministers met to sign off the more targeted approach.

Boris Johnson rejected calls at Tuesday evening’s meeting for a blanket policy, opting instead for imposing hotel quarantine on British citizens from a limited number of countries such as South Africa and Brazil.

The policy is expected to take a number of weeks to implement.

Scientists said they favoured the blanket approach, highlighting that most countries do not have sophisticated surveillance systems that can detect existing or new variants, which makes limiting the policy to certain countries futile...“The big thing about infectious diseases is that they don’t respect international borders,” said Paul Hunter, a professor in medicine at the University of East Anglia.

 

[SheffJeff]

17 minutes ago, zahidf said:

LOOK AT HIS SAD LITTLE FACE. ISNT HE THE REAL VICTIM?

 

Donald?....is....that....you?

[zahidf]

 

[xxialac]

6 minutes ago, zahidf said:

 

Or perhaps the shop happily took our large order and the EU's large order and both have come to collect and the shop are now saying they made a mistake and don't have enough. 

[Toilet Duck]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

mostly still in Wuhan at that point, only Wuhan went into lockdown.

I do wonder though...I was in China at the end of November/Start of December that year (Shanghai and Suzhou, not Wuhan) and I caught something. It was something new I hadn't had before, didn't get a cough, but I ached like mad and was shivering uncontrollably (very weird). I'm anosmic anyway (too many allergies), so I wouldn't have noticed any change in smell (dead handy for the long drops at Glasto though!). I figured it was a flu or something (even though I had my flu shot), but it was definitely different to anything I've had before. Almost everyone else that was with me in China on that trip was sick afterwards as well (maybe up to about 3 weeks later or so).Though there was a nasty RSV infection doing the rounds at the time, none of us developed a cough. Normally I either fly through the Middle East or take the great circle route through Helsinki, but this time we flew with China Eastern for the craic as they had a new plane out of Schipol (I love planes!). But that meant that there were far more Chinese nationals on the plane than there would be with one of the Middle Eastern or European carriers, so there may well have been people from the region the virus emerged from who connected in Shanghai for flights to Europe (I think Wuhan only has direct connections to Europe in London and Rome)...it certainly appears that there were cases in Europe before Christmas at this stage. Anyway, I'll never really know unless I get an antibody test at some point and it could well be far too long ago by now, but I think the initial surveillance of what was happening as the virus emerged is a bit murky (hence WHO would like to properly investigate!). 

[kalifire]

6 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

I do wonder though...I was in China at the end of November/Start of December that year...

I've had similar thoughts. My ex and I both travelled through Hong Kong airport at the start of 2020. She went about a week before I did, and picked up 'a bug' she suffered from for a few days when she got back to Australia. They were talking about an outbreak of 'pneumonia' at the time, which obviously we didn't think too much about. In retrospect, we probably missed the full outbreak by maybe two or three weeks. Scary to think about, to be honest.

[Toilet Duck]

8 hours ago, Copperface said:

Mr Duck,

Maybe you can put this AZ efficacy confusion to bed. Even AZ haven't clarified the below, nor have MHRA or anyone else.

The way I understand it is as follows:

The standard two dose SD:SD regimen was reported at 62.5% from the trials.  (https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32661-1/fulltext)

The LD:SD dose on a small trial subsection but nobody over 55 yielded a 90% efficacy rate.

AZ when they presented to MHRA and JCVI gave data which averaged the two percentages (not including trial group sizes) out giving a rate of 70%.

MHRA then gave out a 73% efficacy based on one dose after an 'exploratory analysis of 'some' trial participants but no data presented.

Confusion abounds. How does one dose have more efficacy than two?
Is this correct?

Howdy, page 35 of the linked document below goes into the data behind the extended gap (and above it is some of the details on the protection from the first dose). The MHRA authorisation also goes into it in a good bit more detail than was available in the Lancet publication. Basically, when the regulators are looking at the data for authorisation they look at the phase 3 data, but they also have all the initial development work, all the previously published data supporting the approach, data on the use of similar vaccines previously, all the pre-clinical data, all the phase 1 data, all the phase 2 data, all the formulation data, all the manufacturing QC data and anything else the company thinks will support a case for authorisation, so it's a much more in depth look at the entire development, testing and manufacturing process of the vaccine than just looking at efficacy and safety data from the phase 3 trial. The totality of that information is what allows the regulators to make a decision on whether to grant authorisation to use it and in whom. It's entirely possible for different panels of experts to interpret the data differently, also possible to have more conservative regulators who may limit use (especially if other options are available) and indeed, the authorisations of other vaccines haven't been unanimously approved even within the same expert panel. 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/949772/UKPAR_COVID_19_Vaccine_AstraZeneca_05.01.2021.pdf

 

Edit: Also, table 3 on page 28 shows the immune response by dose and interval. You'll see that the seroconversion rate (basically the strength of the immune response) in SD:SD vs LD:SD is more or less the same with the longer gap (and is the best immune response they saw...it gets better the longer the interval between doses). They specifically indicate that the amount of neutralising antibody for older adults (>65y) was lower, in contrast to their phase 2 data (though they comment that there are more older adults with co-morbidities in the phase 3), and that they also mostly had a gap of <6weeks. They also state in their efficacy analysis "There is limited information available on efficacy in participants aged 65 or over, although there is nothing to suggest lack of protection". I presume this part is where the controversy lies (do you extrapolate from the phase 2 data that says older adults have just as good an immune response and assume with a bigger interval they'll do just as well as younger recipients, or do you wait to see empirical data proving this?). 

Edited January 27, 2021 by Toilet Duck
Additional info