Jump to content

When will this shit end?


Chrisp1986

Recommended Posts

I think it depends on a bit on what deliveries of Pfizer and Moderna we have coming. Both of those can also be done with shorter gaps - if supply is going to ramp up we could still get everyone double jabbed quicker with Pfizer/Moderna on a 4-week gap instead of AZ on 8-weeks.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kusy said:

image.png.4fe0167bed4a8f00622b9196cc054117.png

It would be useful to know more about those 12 who sadly died despite being fully vaccinated - i.e. were they very elderly, did they have pre-existing conditions etc.

Also would be interested to see a comparison with the fatality rates from the regular variant following 2nd vaccinations.

This doesn't look like good news, but without context it's hard to judge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kusy said:

image.png.4fe0167bed4a8f00622b9196cc054117.png

12 deaths out of 42 suggests fantastic efficacy. Pre-vaccinations, around 99% of the deaths would have been amongst people in the groups who’ve been offered two vaccines.


30 people who have not been fully vaccinated have died. In pre-vaccine times that would mean that 2,970 people in the vulnerable groups would have died (the 30 would make up 1% of total deaths). That suggests that having two doses is 99.6% effective against death from the Indian variant. 
 

Vaccines work 🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

12 out 42 who were fully vaccinated doesn't sound that good...

 

Just now, jimmillen said:

It would be useful to know more about those 12 who sadly died despite being fully vaccinated - i.e. were they very elderly, did they have pre-existing conditions etc.

Also would be interested to see a comparison with the fatality rates from the regular variant following 2nd vaccinations.

This doesn't look like good news, but without context it's hard to judge.

No, 12/42 is VERY good news.

 

In normal times the fully vaccinated would make up 99% of deaths. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

 

No, 12/42 is VERY good news.

 

In normal times the fully vaccinated would make up 99% of deaths. 

I'm not sure I'm following you here. Are you basing that on the assumption that those fully vaccinated were in JCVI groups 1-9, and those who aren't were not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jimmillen said:

I'm not sure I'm following you here. Are you basing that on the assumption that those fully vaccinated were in JCVI groups 1-9, and those who aren't were not?

Roughly, yes. I believe the rollout is at the point now where those in group 9 are getting their second dose. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

12 out 42 who were fully vaccinated doesn't sound that good...

 

2 minutes ago, jimmillen said:

It would be useful to know more about those 12 who sadly died despite being fully vaccinated - i.e. were they very elderly, did they have pre-existing conditions etc.

Also would be interested to see a comparison with the fatality rates from the regular variant following 2nd vaccinations.

This doesn't look like good news, but without context it's hard to judge.

 

1 minute ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

12 deaths out of 42 suggests fantastic efficacy. Pre-vaccinations, around 99% of the deaths would have been amongst people in the groups who’ve been offered two vaccines.


30 people who have not been fully vaccinated have died. In pre-vaccine times that would mean that 2,970 people in the vulnerable groups would have died (the 30 would make up 1% of total deaths). That suggests that having two doses is 99.6% effective against death from the Indian variant. 
 

Vaccines work 🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻

 

Indeed its exactly what we'd expect

And this sort of information coming out NOW not in the autumn is helpful to manage people's expectations on all this

I think many (not here, just in general) believe that nobody who has had two vaccines will die from this and that could lead to all sorts of panic later in the year when it's proven less than accurate. Seeing that sort of figure now could offset that reaction, and fits in with Chris whitty's "acceptable number of deaths" and "living with it like flu" comments. 

Watch the twitter panic at that figure over the next few hours though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Roughly, yes. I believe the rollout is at the point now where those in group 9 are getting their second dose. 

Gotcha. That's kind of what I was getting at saying to be meaningful, we need to know the demographics of those who have died after double vaccinations.

If indeed they were all in highly vulnerable groups, then I agree - it's not bad news at all. 

OTOH, if it includes young, previously healthy NHS workers or similar then it might be very bad.

Thankfully whilst we might not have the data, hopefully those making the decisions will do...!

Edited by jimmillen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jimmillen said:

Gotcha. That's kind of what I was getting at saying to be meaningful, we need to know the demographics of those who have died after double vaccinations.

If indeed they were all in highly vulnerable groups, then I agree - it's not bad news at all. 

OTOH, if it includes previously healthy NHS workers or similar then it might be very bad.

Thankfully whilst we might not have the data, hopefully those making the decisions will do...!

To be fair I forgot that healthcare workers are included in the priority groups. I was just translating it to age and UHC’s.

 

@Toilet Duck is my fag packet maths in any way OK? I calculate 99.6% efficacy against death. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Potentially have to cancel my vaccination for later today, but I've gone onto the 'manage booking' area of the NHS website and am getting the following message:

If you want to cancel your appointments you will have to come back tomorrow to cancel and rebook.

That seems bonkers, surely they would prefer I cancel before the appointment rather than afterwards?

Anybody else had this issue? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, El Matador said:

Worth remembering that dying within 28 days of a positive covid test is not the same as dying because of covid as well. 

This is true - at such small numbers even a handful of these can muddy the waters a lot

Hopefully that new way of counting hospitalisations (whether they're ill with it or just tested positive) will extend to death figures as well

Edited by efcfanwirral
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Kusy said:

image.png.4fe0167bed4a8f00622b9196cc054117.png

I still struggle with the wording and the difference between with and because of...

Those 12 people could have died of say heart failure and just had a positive test while in hospital? I wish they would determine the difference.... especially when the numbers are so low and the difference is of more significance than ever. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another question on those 12 deaths- did they die within two weeks of being fully vaccinated? Or did they contract it without two weeks of being fully vaccinated? If the former (which is how I read it) then the protection from the second won't have kicked in yet.

Edited by Zoo Music Girl
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.



×
×
  • Create New...