Coronavirus

[Harry's Lad]

9 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

I don't see that myself. It's like how hard it is for the GOP to turn their back on trump. Like trump, he tapped into a section of the community their party had never done before. With trump it's mostly people who didn't vote, with Johnson it's the disolussioned labour voters of the north. Both voters feel they've never been heard before and both are incredibly loyal and have made a difference to the right wing parties. And all that was required to get both onside was to wave a flag and blame the foreigners. The Tories, just like the GOP, will be petrified of losing that vote, because without it they're fucked, especially if they those voters vote the other way or split the right wing in two. The 1922 committee are probably desperate to get rid of Johnson, but while he keeps those voters onside, they won't turn against him. 

I think they'll be keeping a close eye on the opinion polls. As soon as it drops to a certain level and Labour start to have a consistent lead, they'll start.

 

Fucking the country and the people over is one thing, but all they care about is their party and staying in power and he is jeopardizing that.

 

It may well be wishful thinking on my part, but time will tell.

[Barrington Womble]

16 minutes ago, Harry's Lad said:

I think they'll be keeping a close eye on the opinion polls. As soon as it drops to a certain level and Labour start to have a consistent lead, they'll start.

 

Fucking the country and the people over is one thing, but all they care about is their party and staying in power and he is jeopardizing that.

 

It may well be wishful thinking on my part, but time will tell.

I agree with all that, except right now I would be surprised if the Brexit dickheads would walk away from him. He'll have some other flag waving shit to get them all going again now. Like a vaccine proof British covid strain, created entirely from our botched attempt to vaccinate people. World leading. 

[magicrat]

3 hours ago, Barrington Womble said:

Spot on that except the last sentence. I think that cunt got some type of vaccine that prevents the majority of people seeing him for the cunt he is. 

Not about the people it's about the Tory party and at what point does he become more of a liability than an asset.

They have plenty of dirt on Johnson and he will go quietly when the tap on the shoulder comes. I daresay the useless fuck will be glad to be out of the firing line and be happy dining out on getting Brexit done

[Jenson]

8 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Surely they'd still be better off having a single dose than no dose.

I think this is a interesting point and it seems to me that people are somewhat confused about what is meant when vaccine efficiency is reported.

If the Pfizer or Oxford vaccine shows 60% efficiency after 1 dose, it doesn't mean that is the level of protection you get from the vaccine, it means that is the chance of you being protected.

The results of the Oxford trials showed that for every 100 people vaccinated with 1 dose and then exposed to the virus, 60 were immune to infection and 40 were not. This means that the levels of protection against infection given by  1 dose of the vaccine were 100% for 60/100 people and 0% for 40/100.

In addition, one of the key stats in that trial was that none of the 40% who were infected after 1 dose went on to develop serious illness, giving rise to the claim of 100% protection against becoming seriously ill even if you are infected. I think this is the reasoning behind the Government's idea to delay the 2nd dose in order to administer the first dose to as many people as possible as quickly as possible, as the results of the trial suggest that 1 dose will be enough to stop people dying or needing hospital treatment.

As loathe as I am to agree with anything this government says or does, I think it's probably the right approach at this moment in time.

[Anubis]

With Brexit done and a vaccine in the bag I think Johnson will quite happily cede the PM role now he can check it off his bucket list, and we can look forward to a new narrative that mistakes were made but this is a fresh start and we should all come together to move forward to make Britain great again.

[3 Stacks]

2 hours ago, Jenson said:

I think this is a interesting point and it seems to me that people are somewhat confused about what is meant when vaccine efficiency is reported.

If the Pfizer or Oxford vaccine shows 60% efficiency after 1 dose, it doesn't mean that is the level of protection you get from the vaccine, it means that is the chance of you being protected.

The results of the Oxford trials showed that for every 100 people vaccinated with 1 dose and then exposed to the virus, 60 were immune to infection and 40 were not. This means that the levels of protection against infection given by  1 dose of the vaccine were 100% for 60/100 people and 0% for 40/100.

In addition, one of the key stats in that trial was that none of the 40% who were infected after 1 dose went on to develop serious illness, giving rise to the claim of 100% protection against becoming seriously ill even if you are infected. I think this is the reasoning behind the Government's idea to delay the 2nd dose in order to administer the first dose to as many people as possible as quickly as possible, as the results of the trial suggest that 1 dose will be enough to stop people dying or needing hospital treatment.

As loathe as I am to agree with anything this government says or does, I think it's probably the right approach at this moment in time.

Good info. Thought the percentage was a degree of protection rather than chance of getting infected. That's more positive then, with the no one getting serious disease thing too.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Anubis said:

With Brexit done and a vaccine in the bag I think Johnson will quite happily cede the PM role now he can check it off his bucket list, and we can look forward to a new narrative that mistakes were made but this is a fresh start and we should all come together to move forward to make Britain great again.

[Bobby Hundreds]

I'm positive for covid. My symptoms so far are slightly heavy eye balls.

[skend04]

On 01/01/2021 at 23:21, Nelly-Torres said:

They're going to fuck this up, aren't they? 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/01/health/coronavirus-vaccines-britain.html#click=https://t.co/bQv9rC3eTO

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55519042

 

BMJ asking NYT for full retraction of the claim that their guidelines allow for vaccine mixing.

[Mudface]

40 minutes ago, skend04 said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55519042

 

BMJ asking NYT for full retraction of the claim that their guidelines allow for vaccine mixing.

A bit bizarre, they seem to be quibbling about the word 'recommendation' rather than anything, and also look to completely contradict themselves-

 

Ms Godlee said the paper's report was "seriously misleading and requires urgent correction".

She said the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) does not make any recommendation to mix and match.

 

Which is correct, and the NYT article also doesn't say it recommends mix and matching, other than in the specific cases where a second dose of the vaccine isn't available or the first one is unknown. Which is confirmed by the spokeswoman for PHE-

 

Dr Mary Ramsay, Public Health England's head of immunisations, said: "We do not recommend mixing the Covid-19 vaccines - if your first dose is the Pfizer vaccine you should not be given the AstraZeneca vaccine for your second dose and vice versa."

Dr Ramsay added that on the "extremely rare occasions" where the same vaccine is unavailable or it is unknown which jab the patient received, it is "better to give a second dose of another vaccine than not at all".

 

The main point is that this shouldn't be happening at all.

[Section_31]

6 hours ago, Jenson said:

I think this is a interesting point and it seems to me that people are somewhat confused about what is meant when vaccine efficiency is reported.

If the Pfizer or Oxford vaccine shows 60% efficiency after 1 dose, it doesn't mean that is the level of protection you get from the vaccine, it means that is the chance of you being protected.

The results of the Oxford trials showed that for every 100 people vaccinated with 1 dose and then exposed to the virus, 60 were immune to infection and 40 were not. This means that the levels of protection against infection given by  1 dose of the vaccine were 100% for 60/100 people and 0% for 40/100.

In addition, one of the key stats in that trial was that none of the 40% who were infected after 1 dose went on to develop serious illness, giving rise to the claim of 100% protection against becoming seriously ill even if you are infected. I think this is the reasoning behind the Government's idea to delay the 2nd dose in order to administer the first dose to as many people as possible as quickly as possible, as the results of the trial suggest that 1 dose will be enough to stop people dying or needing hospital treatment.

As loathe as I am to agree with anything this government says or does, I think it's probably the right approach at this moment in time.

Is that true, because the stuff I've read about the Oxford vaccine is that nobody who's taken it got severe disease or was hospitalised? Genuine question as I'm clueless.

[chrisbonnie]

2 hours ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

I'm positive for covid. My symptoms so far are slightly heavy eye balls.

Any idea how you got it? 

[Bobby Hundreds]

15 minutes ago, chrisbonnie said:

Any idea how you got it? 

Missus family.

[Champ]

Fuckwit

[Captain Turdseye]

How do they square the circle of having to shut primary schools in London, with infections rising everywhere else at the same kind of rate?

[Moo]

7 hours ago, Jenson said:

I think this is a interesting point and it seems to me that people are somewhat confused about what is meant when vaccine efficiency is reported.

If the Pfizer or Oxford vaccine shows 60% efficiency after 1 dose, it doesn't mean that is the level of protection you get from the vaccine, it means that is the chance of you being protected.

The results of the Oxford trials showed that for every 100 people vaccinated with 1 dose and then exposed to the virus, 60 were immune to infection and 40 were not. This means that the levels of protection against infection given by  1 dose of the vaccine were 100% for 60/100 people and 0% for 40/100.

In addition, one of the key stats in that trial was that none of the 40% who were infected after 1 dose went on to develop serious illness, giving rise to the claim of 100% protection against becoming seriously ill even if you are infected. I think this is the reasoning behind the Government's idea to delay the 2nd dose in order to administer the first dose to as many people as possible as quickly as possible, as the results of the trial suggest that 1 dose will be enough to stop people dying or needing hospital treatment.

As loathe as I am to agree with anything this government says or does, I think it's probably the right approach at this moment in time.

I'm not sure that is the case re Oxford efficacy:

"Our vaccine gives partial immunity beyond day 22 of first dose with our initial results showing that two doses provide more robust protection beyond three months"

 

Besides, the main concern is the Pfizer one which they cannot vouch for beyond 21 days:

“there is no data to demonstrate that protection after the first dose is sustained after 21 days.”

[Preston Red]

"Covid is spreading in schools but send your children to school as we have to keep up with our policy of incompetence". (Tory Party, 2021)

[Champ]

16 minutes ago, Captain Turdseye said:

How do they square the circle of having to shut primary schools in London, with infections rising everywhere else at the same kind of rate?

When there’s no London bias?

[Paulie Dangerously]

I've decided I'm going in tomorrow as we're in Tier 3. My colleagues have mostly said the same as well. However, I can see something changing either today or next week which will mean the schools shut anyway. 

 

[littletedwest]

As mentioned if there is "no doubt in his mind" schools are safe why close a single one?

 

[Scooby Dudek]

Liverpool leaders have called for new national lockdown;

 

BBC News - Covid: Liverpool's leaders call for new national lockdown

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-55520939

 

 

No doubt when we have a national lockdown in a couple of weeks we can all call Liverpool leaders Captain Hindsight.

[Stouffer]

Results have came back negative for the Mrs and I, if the kids were contagious when we spent time together we would surely have caught it, I'm really surprised at that result.

[Creator Supreme]

5 minutes ago, Scooby Dudek said:

Liverpool leaders have called for new national lockdown;

 

BBC News - Covid: Liverpool's leaders call for new national lockdown

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-55520939

 

 

No doubt when we have a national lockdown in a couple of weeks we can all call Liverpool leaders Captain Hindsight.

I think it's the only option. The school organization is horrendous! Our 9 year old is back tomorrow as is our 16 year old, but our 14 year old is home schooling until 18th. I mean what a clusterfuck. It's a good job I'm home working at present, and my missus works in a school otherwise child care would be crazy!

 

The numbers are insane cases wise anyway. Lock it down and sort the furlough out you government cunts!

[johnsusername]

2 minutes ago, Stouffer said:

Results have came back negative for the Mrs and I, if the kids were contagious when we spent time together we would surely have caught it, I'm really surprised at that result.

Which tests - the quick one or the longer one?

 

I got a negative result from the quick lateral flow when I had it. Had to get a private test to get the positive. Crazy.

[Stouffer]

5 minutes ago, johnsusername said:

Which tests - the quick one or the longer one?

 

I got a negative result from the quick lateral flow when I had it. Had to get a private test to get the positive. Crazy.

The longer one. Kids tested positive on the 29th after we'd spent a couple of days in close proximity to them for prolonged periods. I've also had mild symptoms yet the Mrs and I have tested negative.