COVID-19 — Coronavirus

[squirtyflower]

The MHRA said they had worked incredibly hard and referred to “24/7” to get the vaccine approved. Key decision makers in the MHRA, including the CEO, started their careers with vocational training they typically included working 100 hour weeks. Yes the Americans and the EMA work hard too but maybe our guys have worked just that bit harder, as well as smarter.

I think what you are saying there is that Lammy was conservative with the truth yesterday.

 

[Tim of the Oak]

You’d think that with something as important as this that they would change their protocol of scheduled meetings and have an emergency meeting instead!

They can give emergency clearance by I assume web-ex or maybe even email

 

[Bluesince1979]

A hypothetical question - I live in Stockport which is in Tier 3 (despite having relatively low infection rates), but Poynton, a few miles away, is in Tier 2. Would I be breaking the rules by going to a restaurant in Poynton?

Dont be bringing your tier 3 muck to
P-town!!!

 

[Tim of the Oak]

The grim year continues. I saw on Facebook this morning that Andy Kimber has passed away after a short illness. I don’t know if it’s anything to do with Covid or not. What a brilliant guy who would liven up an away trip with his great enthusiasm for City. He also trained goalkeepers in Crewe / Sandbach IIRC. His wife Janice has always been a star too.

Andy occasionally posted on here but I’m struggling to remember his user name. I don’t want to get it wrong as there are a few posters with names linked to Colin Bell. RIP Andy, a true gentleman and a fantastic Blue.

 

[squirtyflower]

You’d think that with something as important as this that they would change their protocol of scheduled meetings and have an emergency meeting instead!

Small can be nippy and change direction quickly.
Large with lots of competing interests (I.e. countries/states) are much less agile, especially when they need agreement from all parties.

 

[andyhinch]

A hypothetical question - I live in Stockport which is in Tier 3 (despite having relatively low infection rates), but Poynton, a few miles away, is in Tier 2. Would I be breaking the rules by going to a restaurant in Poynton?

I’m in a similar situation, my daughter lives in Bramhall which is T3 don’t think I can take her to lunch here, not illegal but advised against.

 

[Healdplace]

Scotland data up first:

51 deaths (same as last week)

958 cases at 4.3 % positive - falls again

982 Patients (down 8)

69 on icu ventilators (up 1)

 

[Ban-jani]

You'd be breaking the 'guidance' but not the law. It's advice only not law. I live in Offerton and Poynton is only 3 miles away from me!

I live in Romiley and not far either. What’s frustrating is Romiley/Compstall has been in green for a while on the government live interactive map, meaning it’s got very few cases.

Looks like only about 10% of the country like that and yet we’re tier 3.

 

[Manc Born & Bred]

A hypothetical question - I live in Stockport which is in Tier 3 (despite having relatively low infection rates), but Poynton, a few miles away, is in Tier 2. Would I be breaking the rules by going to a restaurant in Poynton?

Same situation as me. Received an email from Gusto recently saying that their Cheadle Hulme restaurant remains closed but that their Knutsford and I think Alderley Edge ones will be reopening and giving me a link to book. Its advised not to travel to a lower tier area from a higher one but there is no law against it.

 

[Healdplace]

Scotland 3 wks v 2 wks v last wk v today

Deaths 45 v 50 v 51 v 51 today

Cases 1216 v 1089 v 1225 v 958 today

Patients 1207 v 1212 v 1125 v 982 today

Ventilators 98 v 85 v 90 v 69 today

 

[03 March 2002]

No. Not at all. I'm sure they are. I'm just wondering what's wrong with the Swiss asking for data on pre-existing conditions and how is that unreasonable? The MHRA hasn't yet published a full report. Looking forward to it so we can see why their view is possibly different than the Swiss.

It's a matter of approach. The Swiss are independent (their MHRA is SwissMedic) They, like the MHRA are incredibly thorough. Each territory is 95% aligned but with certain nuances. For example, the Japanese (in my experience) ask a lot about carcinogens, they will generally ask for additional information around the work done to prove they are not present or below the Theoretical Threshold for Concern as we call it, typically ~10-15 parts per million.

If the MHRA didn't ask for this (we don't know, they've been reviewing since October and information on pre-existing conditions would be available largely at the point of initial study recruitment with further evidence being added to the dossier as it's acquired through the clinical trial). Ultimately the MHRA has said that there were no serious side effects reported (and no side effects outside of normal vaccine administration side effects which lasted more than a day(?)). From this the MHRA is likely to infer therefore with the knowledge of pre-existing conditions of the clinical trial participants that there's no concern. They may have also asked for the additional info and got it. We won't know that.

Don't hold your breath on the full report. I've never seen one and therefore assume they don't provide them. A certificate is issued to the company who owns the process for drug manufacture and it's good to go. In my opinion one of the most clandestine things about the whole process and certainly a potential area for improvement.

My experience of difficulty to register a new drug by territory (hardest first):

1. Japan/Swizerland/UK
2. Europe/America
3. Rest of the world
4. China

 

[somapop]

Wasn't this prof fairly vocal a while back?
Of course, this now fuelling the anti vaxxers latest missives...

 

[andyhinch]

Same situation as me. Received an email from Gusto recently saying that their Cheadle Hulme restaurant remains closed but that their Knutsford and I think Alderley Edge ones will be reopening and giving me a link to book. Its advised not to travel to a lower tier area from a higher one but there is no law against it.

All pubs/restaurants back open in Alderley was doing a bit of shopping there yesterday.

 

[twosips]

It's a matter of approach. The Swiss are independent (their MHRA is SwissMedic) They, like the MHRA are incredibly thorough. Each territory is 95% aligned but with certain nuances. For example, the Japanese (in my experience) ask a lot about carcinogens, they will generally ask for additional information around the work done to prove they are not present or below the Theoretical Threshold for Concern as we call it, typically ~10-15 parts per million.

If the MHRA didn't ask for this (we don't know, they've been reviewing since October and information on pre-existing conditions would be available largely at the point of initial study recruitment with further evidence being added to the dossier as it's acquired through the clinical trial). Ultimately the MHRA has said that there were no serious side effects reported (and no side effects outside of normal vaccine administration side effects which lasted more than a day(?)). From this the MHRA is likely to infer therefore with the knowledge of pre-existing conditions of the clinical trial participants that there's no concern. They may have also asked for the additional info and got it. We won't know that.

Don't hold your breath on the full report. I've never seen one and therefore assume they don't provide them. A certificate is issued to the company who owns the process for drug manufacture and it's good to go. In my opinion one of the most clandestine things about the whole process and certainly a potential area for improvement.

My experience of difficulty to register a new drug by territory (hardest first):

1. Japan/Swizerland/UK
2. Europe/America
3. Rest of the world
4. China

Thank you mate for that. Incredibly useful and informed! Puts my mind at ease a little anyway.

 

[Healdplace]

These discussions in here about whether or not is possible/desirable/legal to visit places outside a tier 3 area to do what you cannot do in a tier 3 area shows exactly why there should not be this regional tier system.

It will be what likely many people are doing as we speak and if there really is a need to stop the spread of a virus in tier 3 areas then allowing it to be spread to lower tier areas by default is utterly stupid.

Especially as we saw it happen in GM when (wrongly imo) the rules were relaxed in Stockport and Wigan because numbers were lower there. And soon they were not. No need to join Mensa to figure out why.

Lockdowns either have to have the same rules for all or not happen. These local restrictions in a patchwork quilt around the UK are like a big sign to the virus saying - this place is waiting for you to come visit.

I live in an area that should not be in tier 3 either. But taking us out would not help us to stay that way.

Not to mention dividing the nation and creating tier envy is politically a very silly way to unite a nation and win you votes.

It is one of those things that sounds great on paper when drawn up by a statistician but counter productive when you try to apply it to a small country where it is very easy to ignore by just travelling a few miles. As naturally many by now totally fed up and frustrated people will be keen to do.

 

[twosips]

Wasn't this prof fairly vocal a while back?
Of course, this now fuelling the anti vaxxers latest missives...

View attachment 6168

He's by far the most balanced of all the scientists on Twitter IMO. Not sure if you're confusing him with someone else who has been more inflammatory, but he's shared a perfectly reasonable article there to discuss a situation that affects the area he lives in.

 

[andyhinch]

It's a matter of approach. The Swiss are independent (their MHRA is SwissMedic) They, like the MHRA are incredibly thorough. Each territory is 95% aligned but with certain nuances. For example, the Japanese (in my experience) ask a lot about carcinogens, they will generally ask for additional information around the work done to prove they are not present or below the Theoretical Threshold for Concern as we call it, typically ~10-15 parts per million.

If the MHRA didn't ask for this (we don't know, they've been reviewing since October and information on pre-existing conditions would be available largely at the point of initial study recruitment with further evidence being added to the dossier as it's acquired through the clinical trial). Ultimately the MHRA has said that there were no serious side effects reported (and no side effects outside of normal vaccine administration side effects which lasted more than a day(?)). From this the MHRA is likely to infer therefore with the knowledge of pre-existing conditions of the clinical trial participants that there's no concern. They may have also asked for the additional info and got it. We won't know that.

Don't hold your breath on the full report. I've never seen one and therefore assume they don't provide them. A certificate is issued to the company who owns the process for drug manufacture and it's good to go. In my opinion one of the most clandestine things about the whole process and certainly a potential area for improvement.

My experience of difficulty to register a new drug by territory (hardest first):

1. Japan/Swizerland/UK
2. Europe/America
3. Rest of the world
4. China

Very informative as ever, cheers.

 

[somapop]

He's by far the most balanced of all the scientists on Twitter IMO. Not sure if you're confusing him with someone else who has been more inflammatory, but he's shared a perfectly reasonable article there to discuss a situation that affects the area he lives in.

Oh, I'm, not suggesting he's inflammatory at all merely this story is now gaining traction within the anti vaxx community (especially given his credentials).

 

[twosips]

Oh, I'm, not suggesting he's inflammatory at all merely this story is now gaining traction within the anti vaxx community (especially given his credentials).

Yeah, a sad downside to it. Guess this is a case of where greater transparency, if possible, would be useful.

 

[somapop]

It's a matter of approach. The Swiss are independent (their MHRA is SwissMedic) They, like the MHRA are incredibly thorough. Each territory is 95% aligned but with certain nuances. For example, the Japanese (in my experience) ask a lot about carcinogens, they will generally ask for additional information around the work done to prove they are not present or below the Theoretical Threshold for Concern as we call it, typically ~10-15 parts per million.

If the MHRA didn't ask for this (we don't know, they've been reviewing since October and information on pre-existing conditions would be available largely at the point of initial study recruitment with further evidence being added to the dossier as it's acquired through the clinical trial). Ultimately the MHRA has said that there were no serious side effects reported (and no side effects outside of normal vaccine administration side effects which lasted more than a day(?)). From this the MHRA is likely to infer therefore with the knowledge of pre-existing conditions of the clinical trial participants that there's no concern. They may have also asked for the additional info and got it. We won't know that.

Don't hold your breath on the full report. I've never seen one and therefore assume they don't provide them. A certificate is issued to the company who owns the process for drug manufacture and it's good to go. In my opinion one of the most clandestine things about the whole process and certainly a potential area for improvement.

My experience of difficulty to register a new drug by territory (hardest first):

1. Japan/Swizerland/UK
2. Europe/America
3. Rest of the world
4. China

Do we have any idea when Swiss/Medic will approve the vaccine? Have family over there is all...