Coronavirus Thread (Off Topic, Politics) (6 Viewers)

Forums New posts
W

wingy

Well-Known Member
SBT said:
The 70% is what you get from combining the 62% group (two doses) with the 90% group (one and a half doses)



The share price of Oxford University?

What it shows is that there’s no pressure to sugarcoat anything and they’re going to give us the data as it comes, good and bad. It’s a shame the public and the media isn’t better with numbers but we should be reassured by how this has been handled.
Click to expand...
Astrazenica.
Although the data of the second more successful regimen based on 3k volunteers appears to increase effectiveness and make the vaccine go further,why downplay that .
Unless they don't have full confidence.
Pundit's observer's etc saying I'd be extremely happy with 70%,why would that be , it's farcical to me.
Either the most affective usage and resultant protection, the 62% regimen is deemed useless/ pointless by the other .
 
C

CCFCSteve

Well-Known Member
NorthernWisdom said:
Yeah, that's true enough. I do also like the fact it's set up to supply the world ahead of profit.

After all, if the vaccine wears off after a while, if we don't suppress it globally, we're back here again down the line...
Click to expand...

They’re not there yet but as mentioned previously, it’s something we should be proud of if it gets fully authorised. It’s one we’ve financially backed as a country and as you say we/they aren’t looking to profit. Could be massive not just for us but globally, especially if it’s correct that it can be stored/transported easier than Pfizers

edit - again, if fully authorised, it might also help to drive down the cost of the other vaccines. Again, great for developing/poorer nations (as well as us)
 
Last edited:
S

SBT

Well-Known Member
wingy said:
Astrazenica.
Although the data of the second more successful regimen based on 3k volunteers appears to increase effectiveness and make the vaccine go further,why downplay that .
Unless they don't have full confidence.
Pundit's observer's etc saying I'd be extremely happy with 70%,why would that be , it's farcical to me.
Either the most affective usage and resultant protection, the 62% regimen is deemed useless/ pointless by the other .
Click to expand...

Oxford University don’t care about AZ’s share price and even if they did there’s no reason for them to try and tank its shares (unless this entire vaccine program is an elaborate short-selling scheme....I’m gonna guess it’s not)

As for pundits saying they’d be happy with 70% - that was what many scientists said was their best case scenario before we got the first set of test results. 70% would be in line with various vaccines for other diseases (flu etc) and worth celebrating in itself. The fact that we’ve hit 90% is both a pleasant surprise and a cause for even more optimism (which is why you saw markets go crazy when the first results come out).

This all looks like a huge achievement.
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
The Astra Zeneca one is pretty promising given the lack of constraints on storage and distribution.

The British media is an utter embarrassment with the national BBC now being the worst of it. Misleading, sensationalist headlines over reporting of fact.

Inform, educate, entertain.

As AZ is offering the vaccine at cost its share price has fallen, why the fuck are we slaves to the market again?
 
W

wingy

Well-Known Member
SBT said:
Oxford University don’t care about AZ’s share price and even if they did there’s no reason for them to try and tank its shares (unless this entire vaccine program is an elaborate short-selling scheme....I’m gonna guess it’s not)

As for pundits saying they’d be happy with 70% - that was what many scientists said was their best case scenario before we got the first set of test results. 70% would be in line with various vaccines for other diseases (flu etc) and worth celebrating in itself. The fact that we’ve hit 90% is both a pleasant surprise and a cause for even more optimism (which is why you saw markets go crazy when the first results come out).

This all looks like a huge achievement.
Click to expand...
I just find the focus around the lower figure irrelevant, inclusion of the lower data suppresses the efficacy and wastes dosage.
Just my opinion I'll leave it there as just my opinion.
 
S

SBT

Well-Known Member
wingy said:
I just find the focus around the lower figure irrelevant, inclusion of the lower data suppresses the efficacy and wastes dosage.
Just my opinion I'll leave it there as just my opinion.
Click to expand...

These are just test results - the scientists’ job is to collect them and report them, they are what they are. Governments are free to do what they like with the information (and I think it’s pretty obvious what they should do)

Put another way - test results also show chicken tikka masala is less tasty and effective when taken as a suppository but it won’t stop me from ordering it.
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
clint van damme said:
they've broken their own lockdown rules, misappropriated public funds, bent if not broken the planning laws to deprive a poor London borough of 40 million and been found guilty of bullying since this pandemic started and they haven't apologised for anything.
It should be a national scandal but very few people seem to give a fuck.
Click to expand...

Because the Sun and Daily Mail aren't telling them to give a fuck.
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
wingy said:
I just find the focus around the lower figure irrelevant, inclusion of the lower data suppresses the efficacy and wastes dosage.
Just my opinion I'll leave it there as just my opinion.
Click to expand...
Not sure there's any big conspiracy to suppress good news. Think its more likely that those responsible for getting articles up on various news websites quickly don't have the knowledge to fully understand a press release that isn't in an easy to understand format.
One dosing regimen (n=2,741) showed vaccine efficacy of 90% when AZD1222 was given as a half dose, followed by a full dose at least one month apart, and another dosing regimen (n=8,895) showed 62% efficacy when given as two full doses at least one month apart. The combined analysis from both dosing regimens (n=11,636) resulted in an average efficacy of 70%. All results were statistically significant (p<=0.0001). More data will continue to accumulate and additional analysis will be conducted, refining the efficacy reading and establishing the duration of protection.
Click to expand...
 
W

wingy

Well-Known Member
Here's a thought.
If it's presented as less effective than those previously announced from overseas at greater cost and difficulty in delivery would that stimulate demand in the British public to seek/prefer those at greater cost .
Looking to deep?
Sorry can't get my head around the downplaying.
Would release more to give away to the WHO?
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
chiefdave said:
Not sure there's any big conspiracy to suppress good news. Think its more likely that those responsible for getting articles up on various news websites quickly don't have the knowledge to fully understand a press release that isn't in an easy to understand format.
Click to expand...

What I can't understand is why they averaged out the results of the two? Shouldn't they be extolling the fact it's MORE effective with LESS being needed?

If they're separate trials involving two doses and one and a half doses keep them separate.

It'd be like me saying if I have one bottle of wine there's only a 10% chance I'll be sick. If I have a second bottle of wine there's a 60% chance I'll be sick. If I have a third there's a 90% chance I'll be sick. So therefore if I drink wine there's a 53% chance I'll be sick.
 
B

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
W

wingy

Well-Known Member
Brighton Sky Blue said:
If we can get to everyone or nearly everyone asymptomatic that’ll do
Click to expand...
analysis also suggested there was a reduction in the number of people being infected without developing symptoms, who are still thought to be able to spread the virus

This bits relevant too,yes?
Fill us in scientist.
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
The efficacy is only part of the equation though, far less is being made of the true effectiveness of it which is about the vaccine and how easy it is to administer. It's all well and good having a 95% effective vaccine from Moderna that works brilliantly in a lab but needs to be stored at -70 with specialised distribution. But, as usual with our incredibly dumbed down press, they are focusing on headline numbers they pluck out.
 
C

CCFCSteve

Well-Known Member
David O'Day said:
Got the silly Wetherspoons friendly pub laws, only pubs that serve food can open
Click to expand...

Id even take that at the moment though (concerned Birmingham will end up in T3)

Interesting comments in the Guardian article

‘Tier positions will be reviewed every 14 days, and will be based on five criteria: case numbers across all age groups; cases in those aged over 60; the rate of rise or fall in infections; the percentage of those tested who have the virus; and current and projected pressures on the NHS locally.’

Good news that they’ll be reviewed fortnightly rather than monthly and clearer (hopefully sensible if applied correctly) criteria

ps still gonna be shit but would take almost anything over full lockdown/T3
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
I have had one of those stomach reduction ops so a substantial meal for me is a slice of lemon - oh dump that in a treble G and T to save potential infection from a plate
 
B

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
wingy said:
analysis also suggested there was a reduction in the number of people being infected without developing symptoms, who are still thought to be able to spread the virus

This bits relevant too,yes?
Fill us in scientist.
Click to expand...

The Oxford vaccine during testing on animals didn’t prevent infection but it did eliminate symptoms. May have worked out differently in humans but haven’t looked at it in a while
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
CCFCSteve said:
Is that euphemism SBD ?
Click to expand...

Well she was apparently shagging fellow MP Mark Field...

Although she did also give a speech saying how disgraceful it was we import 2/3 of our cheese. Really don't want to think what the euphemism was there...

* it's about a couple of soundbites of hers that used to be shown regularly on Have I Got News For You.
 
W

wingy

Well-Known Member
Brighton Sky Blue said:
The Oxford vaccine during testing on animals didn’t prevent infection but it did eliminate symptoms. May have worked out differently in humans but haven’t looked at it in a while
Click to expand...
Thought there's a suggestion it may potentially at least in part prevent onward transmission?🤔
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top