The Coronavirus thread.

[MyQul]

Totally beyond comprehension, who are these people, what is their agenda?

No idea. Just another day in the hamlet. These are just 'normal' peckhamite nutters. Nothing unusual for around here

 

[foxy]

No idea. Just another day in the hamlet. These are just 'normal' peckhamite nutters. Nothing unusual for around here

I have always said, you can never have a good working democracy without you shoot a few people

 

[Covrich]

Serious question ;
If a Vaccine was made available next week would you have it?

I am in no way an anti vaxer and always would have a vaccine ext, however have to say I understand the trepidation shared by the nation.. How do we know this in such a short amount of time without the years of testing is actually safe?

Russia are supposedly pushing their out in a few weeks.



It is mad the world we live in this thing wreaks havoc across the globe and rather than we all work together as a species with various knowledge and trials collaboratively, instead we all keep secrets to win the race so which pharma can make the most money.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Serious question ;
If a Vaccine was made available next week would you have it?

I am in no way an anti vaxer and always would have a vaccine ext, however have to say I understand the trepidation shared by the nation.. How do we know this in such a short amount of time without the years of testing is actually safe?

Russia are supposedly pushing their out in a few weeks.

I'd have a bit of a problem taking the Russian one for that reason, I don't have confidence in their testing regime. But you have to remember that *no* pharmaceutical is 100% "safe", it's *always* a balance of risk and benefit. So I would take one that had been tested in the West and approved - they are massively accelerating development but they are going through the usual tests as far as possible. And one thing that is speeding things up is that they're taking a punt to manufacture millions of doses before the testing has finished, that wouldn't happen normally. At least vaccines are relatively "easy" to test, at least for safety - the averages are skewed by things like Alzheimer drugs where you have to wait years for the disease to run its normal course in the control patients before you can tell if the drug is having any effect.

It is mad the world we live in this thing wreaks havoc across the globe and rather than we all work together as a species with various knowledge and trials collaboratively, instead we all keep secrets to win the race so which pharma can make the most money.

If you think that, then you need to reconsider where you get your news, you're getting the propaganda version. See eg here :
"As part of the agreement signed in April between the University of Oxford and AstraZeneca, AstraZeneca continues to build a number of supply chains in parallel across the world, including for Europe. The Company is seeking to expand manufacturing capacity further and is open to collaborating with other companies in order to meet its commitment to support access to the vaccine at no profit during the pandemic. "

Or here :
"GSK today confirmed its intention to manufacture 1 billion doses of its pandemic vaccine adjuvant system, in 2021, to support the development of multiple adjuvanted COVID-19 vaccine candidates...Given the unprecedented need to develop COVID-19 vaccines, GSK has started manufacture of the adjuvant at risk...GSK is committed to making its adjuvant available through mechanisms that offer fair access for people across the world. Making the adjuvant available to the world’s poorest countries will also be a key part of these efforts, including donations, by working with governments and the global institutions that prioritise access...Overall GSK does not expect to profit from sales of its portfolio of collaborations for COVID-19 vaccines made during this pandemic phase"

And arguably, one of the reasons we are where we are is because companies haven't been making enough money out of vaccines, after governments went back on deals for vaccines for SARS, MERS etc most companies decided that it wasn't worth their while making the slow, long-term investments in research that 95% of the time generates no income. There's a good argument that one of the best investments government could make is just to bung say £50m/year in maintaining that capability in case it's needed, in the same way that eg some defence manunfacturers are given a fixed sum each year to maintain our capability to make missiles etc.

We're seeing unprecedented collaboration and sharing of data between companies - and having multiple candidate vaccines is very much a strength of the system, it gives us fall-backs in case one doesn't work.

 

[Old Geezer]

My understanding is the two vaccines undergoing trials in the UK, London and Oxford are really just existing vaccines modified for Covid-19 so should be perfectly safe it's whether they're going to be effective that has to be addressed.

And yes I would have the vaccine, I'll take anything if it's free but I do draw the line at Fosters.

 

[simon12]

Serious question ;
If a Vaccine was made available next week would you have it?

Short answer no, but if I was 80 and had other health issues and my options are to shield for potentially the rest of my life or have a vaccine then i'd take the Russian one now. While if in a year the Oxford one is there and they claim no side affects I would not give it to a healthy child as covid has virtually no risk to them and if its still around when the become more vulnerable they can have it then.

 

[Covrich]

I'd have a bit of a problem taking the Russian one for that reason, I don't have confidence in their testing regime. But you have to remember that *no* pharmaceutical is 100% "safe", it's *always* a balance of risk and benefit. So I would take one that had been tested in the West and approved - they are massively accelerating development but they are going through the usual tests as far as possible. And one thing that is speeding things up is that they're taking a punt to manufacture millions of doses before the testing has finished, that wouldn't happen normally. At least vaccines are relatively "easy" to test, at least for safety - the averages are skewed by things like Alzheimer drugs where you have to wait years for the disease to run its normal course in the control patients before you can tell if the drug is having any effect.



If you think that, then you need to reconsider where you get your news, you're getting the propaganda version. See eg here :
"As part of the agreement signed in April between the University of Oxford and AstraZeneca, AstraZeneca continues to build a number of supply chains in parallel across the world, including for Europe. The Company is seeking to expand manufacturing capacity further and is open to collaborating with other companies in order to meet its commitment to support access to the vaccine at no profit during the pandemic. "

Or here :
"GSK today confirmed its intention to manufacture 1 billion doses of its pandemic vaccine adjuvant system, in 2021, to support the development of multiple adjuvanted COVID-19 vaccine candidates...Given the unprecedented need to develop COVID-19 vaccines, GSK has started manufacture of the adjuvant at risk...GSK is committed to making its adjuvant available through mechanisms that offer fair access for people across the world. Making the adjuvant available to the world’s poorest countries will also be a key part of these efforts, including donations, by working with governments and the global institutions that prioritise access...Overall GSK does not expect to profit from sales of its portfolio of collaborations for COVID-19 vaccines made during this pandemic phase"

And arguably, one of the reasons we are where we are is because companies haven't been making enough money out of vaccines, after governments went back on deals for vaccines for SARS, MERS etc most companies decided that it wasn't worth their while making the slow, long-term investments in research that 95% of the time generates no income. There's a good argument that one of the best investments government could make is just to bung say £50m/year in maintaining that capability in case it's needed, in the same way that eg some defence manunfacturers are given a fixed sum each year to maintain our capability to make missiles etc.

We're seeing unprecedented collaboration and sharing of data between companies - and having multiple candidate vaccines is very much a strength of the system, it gives us fall-backs in case one doesn't work.

That is good and I conceed that I may be wrong about a few things, I do however tend to avoid the main stream media and go with percpetions and tit bits . I feel like likes of DM Guardian and all that all feed you an specifc angle.

My perhaps cautious belief about world collbaration is I feel things relation to it such as infection and death rates and the data that gets shown to us is very I dunno and whilst there has been an awful notion to compare deaths like a league table alot of countries do not appear to present data like for like. I dunno maybe I am being really cynical but I have some reservations about worldwide mass collaboration.

Hopefully I am wrong but like yourself I wouldn;t trust this russian vaccine at all but I am willing to trust a western one when it is properly ready for sure and not rushed out that may take a year , I am not convinved we will know whetehr it is safe in 2020.

I do think it may end up being for the vulnerable first and foremost, thats what my ex wife thinks almost part of the cocktail jabs people may end up with depending on how things go.

 

[obscure]

Short answer no, but if I was 80 and had other health issues and my options are to shield for potentially the rest of my life or have a vaccine then i'd take the Russian one now. While if in a year the Oxford one is there and they claim no side affects I would not give it to a healthy child as covid has virtually no risk to them and if its still around when the become more vulnerable they can have it then.

I would argue that their are very good reasons to give an effective vaccine to a healthy child, Its the same logic for vaccinating young children against the flu, as it helps reduce the risk of them catching it and passing it onto grandparents or other higher risk groups.

As to if I personally would get vaccinated the answer is yes.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

I would not give it to a healthy child as covid has virtually no risk to them

Thirteen-day-old Covid-19 victim is believed to be youngest person to die from coronavirus in the UK
Child, 5, announced as UK's youngest coronavirus victim as death toll reaches 4,313
An 11-year-old boy is Florida's youngest person to die from Covid-19 complications

If that's not bad enough, try :
Adults may not be the only Covid 'long haulers.' Some kids still have symptoms, months after falling ill

Fourteen-year-old Indiana Evans...fell ill with a cough in early March...She was never ill enough to be hospitalized...Nonetheless, the teenager -- who planned to audition for prestigious dance schools -- can now barely manage a trip to the supermarket...

a tiny proportion of children and teenagers have been hospitalized in the US, United Kingdom, Italy and elsewhere with a rare condition known as multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, or MIS-C, a potential complication following Covid-19 infections...."what is an issue in a small minority of children is hyper-inflammatory syndrome, where they get quite unwell and get admitted."

 

[simon12]

Thirteen-day-old Covid-19 victim is believed to be youngest person to die from coronavirus in the UK
Child, 5, announced as UK's youngest coronavirus victim as death toll reaches 4,313
An 11-year-old boy is Florida's youngest person to die from Covid-19 complications

If that's not bad enough, try :
Adults may not be the only Covid 'long haulers.' Some kids still have symptoms, months after falling ill

Fourteen-year-old Indiana Evans...fell ill with a cough in early March...She was never ill enough to be hospitalized...Nonetheless, the teenager -- who planned to audition for prestigious dance schools -- can now barely manage a trip to the supermarket...

a tiny proportion of children and teenagers have been hospitalized in the US, United Kingdom, Italy and elsewhere with a rare condition known as multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, or MIS-C, a potential complication following Covid-19 infections...."what is an issue in a small minority of children is hyper-inflammatory syndrome, where they get quite unwell and get admitted."

Before I answer I would like to say I highly respect your opinion on this thread and you obviously know alot more than me on the issue. But the number of under 15's who have died from covid in England and Wales is 2, my previous post was short and I didn't mention I would consider the facts at the time but with what I know at the moment I stick with "I would not give it to a healthy child".

 

[Covrich]

I would also say as someone who WOULD vaccinate my kids I take all these stories with a massive pinch of salt.

Guardian and BBC both reported a 21 year old girl with no underlying conditions dying of covid ect, anyway my girlfreind lives near by and they all know them and it turns out she was neevr even tested went to see medical at all.. She was dead and that is what they told the papers and they ran with it.

On the flip side in 2018 my kids had the yearly flu *** at school my at the time wife did too for her work as a front line NHS nurse.. I don't have it.. anyway her ward got overran with Aussie flu and it shut it downa nd she kindly bought it back home .. Despite her *** she was wiped for 3 whole weeks with it, it took me for 5 days.. Kids however didn't touch them, I do think their *** had more protection than the one my Ex had in. Despite the fact I got better I don't think I'd want them to go through that crap.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

But the number of under 15's who have died from covid in England and Wales is 2

Actually it's 5 - see what I mean about getting your news from dodgy - or at the very least very out-of-date - sources? And there's no need to rely on those sources when you can get the current figures direct from ONS (ie from death certificates, not from neighbours making things up for the papers).

It's not many, but it's still 5x the death rate from measles, and you'd give your kid a measles ***, right?

But just looking at deaths rather misses the point, which is that this thing is more like polio - if you get bad, you pray that it kills you because the long-term disability is worse. It's not like flu where you walk away after a few days in bed.

 

[MyQul]

But just looking at deaths rather misses the point, which is that this thing is more like polio - if you get bad, you pray that it kills you because the long-term disability is worse. It's not like flu where you walk away after a few days in bed.

Thats the thing about c-19 that scares me. I'd hate to be one of those 'long haulers'

 

[simon12]

Actually it's 5 - see what I mean about getting your news from dodgy - or at the very least very out-of-date - sources? And there's no need to rely on those sources when you can get the current figures direct from ONS (ie from death certificates, not from neighbours making things up for the papers).

It's not many, but it's still 5x the death rate from measles, and you'd give your kid a measles ***, right?

But just looking at deaths rather misses the point, which is that this thing is more like polio - if you get bad, you pray that it kills you because the long-term disability is worse. It's not like flu where you walk away after a few days in bed.

Yes I would give children the measles *** but I would not give them a Covid one until I was happy there are no possible side effects which at the moment I wouldn't until its been used for many years.

 

[Falco]

Thats the thing about c-19 that scares me. I'd hate to be one of those 'long haulers'

Agreed, and also being infected, asymptomatic, not been tested and being responsible for spreading the virus to all and sundry.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Yes I would give children the measles *** but I would not give them a Covid one until I was happy there are no possible side effects which at the moment I wouldn't until its been used for many years.

That's a much higher standard of risk-prevention than you presumably use in the rest of your life. Do you eat fishcakes? Go to the zoo? Use an umbrella? All these things have a possible side-effect of ... death, but you still do them, right? Do you use Lemsip, Calpol or Gaviscon? They all have side-effects.

Just getting a child to school involves running a gauntlet of risks from an incredibly dangerous mix of electricity and boiling water just to make a cup of tea, to braving one-tonne death machines on the road to school. Definitely possible side-effects there, but you think that on balance the risks are worth it for the benefits.

So if you take risks just for a cup of tea or to cross the road what is your logic for insisting on no possible side-effects, for something that could prevent death or long-term disability?

 

[An Ankoù]

That's a much higher standard of risk-prevention than you presumably use in the rest of your life. Do you eat fishcakes? Go to the zoo? Use an umbrella? All these things have a possible side-effect of ... death, but you still do them, right? Do you use Lemsip, Calpol or Gaviscon? They all have side-effects.

Just getting a child to school involves running a gauntlet of risks from an incredibly dangerous mix of electricity and boiling water just to make a cup of tea, to braving one-tonne death machines on the road to school. Definitely Patiencepossible side-effects there, but you think that on balance the risks are worth it for the benefits.

So if you take risks just for a cup of tea or to cross the road what is your logic for insisting on no possible side-effects, for something that could prevent death or long-term disability?

Fair point N.B. But I think what SImon 12 is saying is that when the new vaccine comes out, it will have been through the required number of trials, but who knows what may turn up in the future. Thalidomide being an extreme example of this. Let those who want to take the risk (and it shouldn't be a great risk) go for it, and those who want to wait let the others be the guinea pigs. You pays your money and you takes your chance. I'm not sure that the first releases of a vaccine will be used with children, though, as they're apparently not the most vulnerable. The question I have to ask myself is whether I would risk having a ***.

 

[Covrich]

Fair point N.B. But I think what SImon 12 is saying is that when the new vaccine comes out, it will have been through the required number of trials, but who knows what may turn up in the future. Thalidomide being an extreme example of this. Let those who want to take the risk (and it shouldn't be a great risk) go for it, and those who want to wait let the others be the guinea pigs. You pays your money and you takes your chance. I'm not sure that the first releases of a vaccine will be used with children, though, as they're apparently not the most vulnerable. The question I have to ask myself is whether I would risk having a ***.

That was the basis of my original question last page, I am all for vaccination but I can understand teh anxiety about willingly accepting one with so much relatively smaller time frame for testing.. not to say I understand the big data behind it and the safety but then again does 60 million people?

 

[Shirley Bassett]

I would have the U.K. vaccine, if it was guaranteed to give long term immunity.

Over the years I’ve had the following vaccines / injections:

Tetanus, Polio, Hep A, B and C, Yellow Fever, Meningitis, TB to name but a few, and these were taken just to go on holiday, or work abroad.

I sometime got a bit shivery or a sore throat afterwards.

It would be nice if it was just compulsory to be vaccinated to eradicate this awful disease.

I have a distant memory of having to have a small pox vaccine in the early 70’s to go on holiday to Spain. This disease has now been officially eradicated.

 

[simon12]

That's a much higher standard of risk-prevention than you presumably use in the rest of your life. Do you eat fishcakes? Go to the zoo? Use an umbrella? All these things have a possible side-effect of ... death, but you still do them, right? Do you use Lemsip, Calpol or Gaviscon? They all have side-effects.

Just getting a child to school involves running a gauntlet of risks from an incredibly dangerous mix of electricity and boiling water just to make a cup of tea, to braving one-tonne death machines on the road to school. Definitely possible side-effects there, but you think that on balance the risks are worth it for the benefits.

So if you take risks just for a cup of tea or to cross the road what is your logic for insisting on no possible side-effects, for something that could prevent death or long-term disability?

I'm not saying i'm looking for no risk just balancing the risk of vaccine vs no vaccine