[Albion] Ffs tier 4

[Bodian]

I understand the thinking is that the efficacy is 91% after the second dose has been given but before that second dose would have had any effect, i.e. it would have got to 91% regardless.

Seems like a good idea to me.

No mention of this in the medical journals. 52% after first, 95% 7 days after the second.

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4826#:~:text=Read%20our%20latest%20coverage%20of%20the%20coronavirus%20outbreak&text=The%20study%2C%20published%20in%20the,cases%20in%20the%20placebo%20group.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Tier 4 or not, we're all one Sussex again and we'll get through this.

 

[dazzer6666]

No mention of this in the medical journals. 52% after first, 95% 7 days after the second.

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4826#:~:text=Read%20our%20latest%20coverage%20of%20the%20coronavirus%20outbreak&text=The%20study%2C%20published%20in%20the,cases%20in%20the%20placebo%20group.

Blair not telling the truth ?

Gobsmacked

 

[Bodian]

Blair not telling the truth ?

Gobsmacked

Or maybe just misled by dodgy documents he's read.....

 

[dazzer6666]

Or maybe just misled by dodgy documents he's read.....

Good point [emoji23][emoji106]

 

[pb21]

No mention of this in the medical journals. 52% after first, 95% 7 days after the second.

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4826#:~:text=Read%20our%20latest%20coverage%20of%20the%20coronavirus%20outbreak&text=The%20study%2C%20published%20in%20the,cases%20in%20the%20placebo%20group.

Its based on data from this paper:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577



The argument is that 7 days after the second dose the efficacy is 91% and that this is too soon after the second dose for that to have any effect on the efficacy.

Don't know if that's a sound argument, but it is 'backed-up' by, professor David Salisbury, the man in charge of immunisation at the Department of Health until 2013.and hasn't been completely ridiculed by people who know about these things.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55410349

 

[Bodian]

Its based on data from this paper:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577

View attachment 131718

The argument is that 7 days after the second dose the efficacy is 91% and that this is too soon after the second dose for that to have any effect on the efficacy.

Don't know if that's a sound argument, but it is 'backed-up' by, professor David Salisbury, the man in charge of immunisation at the Department of Health until 2013.and hasn't been completely ridiculed by people who know about these things.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55410349

Not sure - in this article it says "in the interval between the first and second doses, the observed vaccine efficacy against Covid-19 was 52%, and in the first 7 days after dose 2, it was 91%, reaching full efficacy against disease with onset at least 7 days after dose 2." That seems to say 52%, then when you have the second jab, 91% within 7 days, 95% after 7 days. Doesn't seem to say 91% if don't have second jab? But the BBC article sort of says 'they're not sure' whether the 91% might all be down to the first jab. Confusing isn't it? Glad I'm not a scientist!

 

[pb21]

Not sure - in this article it says "in the interval between the first and second doses, the observed vaccine efficacy against Covid-19 was 52%, and in the first 7 days after dose 2, it was 91%, reaching full efficacy against disease with onset at least 7 days after dose 2." That seems to say 52%, then when you have the second jab, 91% within 7 days, 95% after 7 days. Doesn't seem to say 91% if don't have second jab? But the BBC article sort of says 'they're not sure' whether the 91% might all be down to the first jab. Confusing isn't it? Glad I'm not a scientist!

The key bit is:

... in the first 7 days after dose 2, it was 91%

The argument is that this increase is too soon after the second dose for that second dose to have had any effect. The immune system would not have had a chance to alter following the second dose.

However, I do see the 95% CI is pretty wide, down to 61%, which would change the viability somewhat.

Still I think it's a worthy consideration.

 

[BN41Albion]

Most worrying, the longer this ges on, the less chance there is of ever going back to the old 'normal'. Already handshakes look like a thing of the past. There's a generation of kids growing up who regard social media and now social distancing as the norm. How do you turn the clock back from there?

I can't imagine much changing once this is over. We're sociable creatures; won't take long before it's the norm to hug/handshake etc again when possible. And youngsters on the whole pretty much act as if it doesn't exist anyway when amongst themselves from what I've seen

 

[sydney]

His proposal was backed up by Professor David Salisbury, the man in charge of immunisation at the Department of Health until 2013.

Just going on this!

His proposal was backed up by Professor David Salisbury, the man in charge of immunisation at the Department of Health until 2013.

He told Today the numbers were "straightforward".



He told Today the numbers were "straightforward".

"You give one dose you get 91% [protection] you give two doses and you get 95% - you are only gaining 4% for giving the second dose," he said.

"With current circumstances, I would strongly urge you to use as many first doses as you possibly can for risk groups and only after you have done all of that come back with second doses."

However, he acknowledged this would be harder to do with the Oxford University vaccine, where the efficacy of two doses is 60%

60 % ... on bull a useless tits as ........arrange as you please.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Is that the vaccine that we have got, but didn't bother ordering enough doses of, or the two vaccines that still haven't had regulatory clearance?

And why have only half the hospitals and a third of GP surgeries had no vaccines at all yet. It's all too slow. I thought that the vaccinations would be in the tens of thousands a day. Why so slow?

You sound like you are blaming the government for being the first in the world to administer a vaccine and at a rate of 10000’s a day. A very difficult vaccine to spread around the country as well.

Second to that a government that has ordered from all the vaccine producers quantities enough to cover the population.

I certainly haven’t supported this government but in this case we are streets ahead of most countries.

 

[Steve in Japan]

Determined not to fret too much about Tier 4. The numbers I can see are not bang up-to-date but are trending up.

More worried about the school question. If they have to stay off in January, I do worry about the mental well-being of the kids. Not to mention the parents. January/Feb are grim at the best of times.

Oh, and I had good tickets for the Arsenal game. Thank you God.

 

[dazzer6666]

If we are tier two now, I want to know what the **** is going to happen in the next few days to make us jump straight to tier 4!? Why can't we go to tier 3 now to try to mitigate it? If we know it's going to be worse on boxing day we should be doing something to stop it NOW. It makes so little sense.

It’s already happened.......huge rise in infection rates (comparable or worse to existing T4 areas)

Agree - should have gone to 3 or 4 immediately, not wait until after Christmas.

Sensible people can make up their own minds to act as if in T4 now of course. Fvckwits have a couple more days to try to kill their granny.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Tier 5 idea picked up in a few places

I assume that’s schools shut

 

[zefarelly]

Tier 5 idea picked up in a few places

I assume that’s schools shut

It aint stopping till it gets to 11.

 

[pb21]

Tier 5 idea picked up in a few places

I assume that’s schools shut

https://cmmid.github.io/topics/covi..._and_severity_of_VOC_202012_01_in_England.pdf

This paper very much suggests schools would need to be shut.

 

[dazzer6666]

Are you saying the Tories response is that they know it's tier four bad now but are going to deliberately let people die when they could have prevented it for a week?

Odd question but we all know infection rates have massively increased over the last several days, but measures to try to slow it don’t come into force in many areas until the 26th. Would leave water dripping through your ceiling for a few days before doing something about it ?

I would have preferred it if the action was taken immediately......although I think we’re now close to many people doing their own thing anyway - those with sense already largely acting as if they are in T4 and those that don’t seem to care.

What do you think should have been done ?

 

[dazzer6666]

Follow the science. If the rates are up and we need more restrictions do them when we need them, not a week later.

Exactly

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

I’ve seen more police cars out in the past 12 hours whilst out in Crawley than all of the first lockdown.

Couple driving around and a couple stopped at various places.

 

[dazzer6666]

I’ve seen more police cars out in the past 12 hours whilst out in Crawley than all of the first lockdown.

Couple driving around and a couple stopped at various places.

PNC checks on plates to see how far they’ve travelled perhaps ?