beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 36,031
think the explanation is provided, they didn't die in hospital.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread
- Thread starter GingerBeerMan
- Start date
think the explanation is provided, they didn't die in hospital.
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
I think [MENTION=17745]Poojah[/MENTION] has adequately answered this. People have adverse reactions to getting stung by a wasp, eating nuts, other medication or what have you. Therefore there can never be no risk, however that is the same with the life, I can't take an antibiotic without their being some risk (as it happens it was discovered I have an allergy to Penicillin). Anyway, while incredibly sad that anyone has an adverse reaction, the odds are far less than getting on your bike, or in your car, or just walking down the street.
Therefore, I'm not going to take it because 'it's been rushed through' is just an out of proportion reaction to risk. You will no doubt take far more risks every single day than taking a developing vaccine.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 36,031
no one (at least in the pharma or health business) assumes anything is completely safe. though public do have some blind faith at times. they are safe enough, or wouldn't get through the clinical trials. your data point proves the safety, 6300 injuries from the billions of vaccines given is inconsequential. (for comparison, US records about 30k medical injuries resulting in death every year).
trials for the covid vaccines are as vigorous as any other vaccine or drug, they/ve simply been done without the normal delays associated with projects (manpower, budgets, etc.). teams have dropped everything to work on covid vaccines, and pulled in extra resources that normally wouldn't be available. a new flu vaccine is developed, tested, produced every year, so its not even that unusual.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 36,031
are the infection and hospitalisation rates actually going up, or bit of preemptive over-reaction?
My point is that everyone assumes vaccines are completely safe. They aren't completely safe and these have been thoroughly tested over years before being used.
Lets look at the States where they have paid out $4 Billion to over 6000 people since 1989.
I accept its rare but it happens.
Approximately 3.5m children are born in the US every year (source) of which approximately 90% receive a vaccine for measles (source), so approximately 3.15 million per year. Times 30 years that is 94.5 million vaccines (plus others received by children and adults). 6,000 is 0.007% of that figure.
The fatality rate in the UK of known cases is 8% (source)
darkwolf666
Well-known member
Here we go again, scare stories with no context. The period covered by this report is 39 years, which equates to approximately 32 people a year having serious effects from a vaccination. How many millions of vaccinations are administered per year?
Clearly I don't know what vaccinations were involved, as the article doesn't cover that. However, as you seem to like doing, to add some numbers to that as comparison, nearly 2000 people die a year in the UK in accidents involving road vehicles. Let's all stop driving cars, in case we kill someone!
Please, for all our sanity go and find yourself another hobby, go train spotting, collect car number plates, do manhole rubbings - anything other than keep trawling for more and more stories to prove you are the bringer of truth!
Last edited:
You only have to trawl the news on any given day to realise there are a limitless number of creative and unfortunate ways to die or be seriously injured. Practically everything, and I mean everything, carries a degree of risk, most of it so incredibly tiny that it doesn't matter and we don't give it a moment's thought.
Statistics shouldn't be taken out of context to prove that something is dangerous, when in actual fact the odds of something remotely bad happening to any given individual is smaller than going out in the car or going for a run. I'd go as far as to say that this kind of data manipulation (or at least selectivity) when pushed out to the masses on social media is capable of doing far more damage to human health than any properly tested vaccine.
But anyway, let's just entertain one fact that [MENTION=316]Albion Dan[/MENTION] points out here - that is that any vaccine, assuming it lands in the next six months, will have been developed far quicker than any other in history. This, to the best of my knowledge, is undeniable.
The problem is what comes next; the misconception that 'quick' = 'less robustly tested'. I'm wary of presenting this as fact because I am not a subject matter expert, however my understanding is that fast-tracking a vaccine such as the Oxford / AstraZeneca one does not involve taking any shortcuts whatsoever. It is not subject to fewer trials in humans than any other vaccine would be in more usual circumstances, those trials are simply happening much more quickly because:
- It has unprecedented financial backing, due to urgency of the situation
- There are more willing volunteers for trials, due to the urgency of the situation
- We are able to build a robust understanding of its effectiveness due to the prevalence in places where it is being trialled, such as Brazil (and perhaps soon, the UK)
In my opinion, should a vaccine pass clinical trials and be approved for use in the UK, I would happily receive it in the knowledge that it is almost certainly safer than several things I have already done today and since forgotten about.
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 28,274
I'm not sure what to believe these days, just heard an " expert" on 5live say the upsurge in daily cases is starting to get bad but nothing like March/April when "Estimated daily new cases were about a hundred thousand a day before we were testing thoroughly."..
daveinplzen
New member
- Aug 31, 2018
- 2,846
Hit over 4k new cases in a day and they are worried health system won't cope if it keeps rising.
https://www.expats.cz/czech-news/ar...approves-new-measures-to-curb-covid-19-spread
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 36,031
that is getting high
daveinplzen
New member
- Aug 31, 2018
- 2,846
Or going into them
Deportivo Seagull
I should coco
Not sure why we are surprised. Sending students back to uni and opening schools was always going to lead to this. Packing lots of people into accommodation blocks, sharing bathrooms and kitchens is as about as bad as you could make it. Nottingham is particularly bad at the moment but with a student population of 60k what do you expect.
There are around 14m in education at anyone time ..... the implication that the young are super spreaders isn’t going to help.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
There are around 14m in education at anyone time ..... the implication that the young are super spreaders isn’t going to help.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Hotchilidog
Well-known member
- Jan 24, 2009
- 9,143
https://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2020/10/08/universities-now-have-80-covid-cases/
Unsurprisingly a significant number of new cases in Brighton are students. This is actually a pretty decent non-sensationalist report of the situation.
Unsurprisingly a significant number of new cases in Brighton are students. This is actually a pretty decent non-sensationalist report of the situation.
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,791
So it only costs £2M to save the Government having to explain how it hands out Covid contracts. Sounds like a bargain 
Government to pay £2m to settle coronavirus testing case
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54455666
The BBC understands that the settlement will cost the government up to £2m. British company Diagnostics AI claimed it lost out to a European rival UgenTec despite spotting some positive coronavirus cases its rival missed. It sued the government over the decision, claiming the selection process was "unfair and unlawful".
The dispute was due to be played out in court. It would have meant a public examination of the accuracy and speed of the testing system, at a time when it has come under serious criticism. But the government has decided to settle the case and will pay Diagnostics AI compensation and most of its legal fees.
Government to pay £2m to settle coronavirus testing case
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54455666
The BBC understands that the settlement will cost the government up to £2m. British company Diagnostics AI claimed it lost out to a European rival UgenTec despite spotting some positive coronavirus cases its rival missed. It sued the government over the decision, claiming the selection process was "unfair and unlawful".
The dispute was due to be played out in court. It would have meant a public examination of the accuracy and speed of the testing system, at a time when it has come under serious criticism. But the government has decided to settle the case and will pay Diagnostics AI compensation and most of its legal fees.
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 28,274
It's fair to say that virtually every drug on the market has side effects of some kind or another but we accept the balanced risk of taking it against not taking it. As you say, lots of effort worldwide is focusing on a Covid-19 vaccine and once they do get one I can see the next worldwide effort will be to find a kind of template anti-viral, something that can be adjusted quickly to take account of the variation between Covid-19 and the next problem virus ahead.
Richy_Seagull
Well-known member
If they could provide the ages and areas of infections to provide context and danger areas that would be great.
Yes thats what I keep thinking...yesterdays headline 1000 uni students positive with Covid, well yes, but how many are actully ill or new they had it or go to hospital.
17,000 a day , well again yes but how many are ill and how many go to hospital, its scaring the older folk to death with fear.