Coronavirus (2021) thread

[Nightmare Walking]

@Indaparkside - Mate, if the US think that being double jabbed is good enough to be given the green light for life back then I don’t see why we shouldn’t feel the same and be granted the same freedom. Of course we will still be as careful as possible within reason but do you really think we shouldn’t have gone round to a mate‘s house to watch the game when in 48 hours it’s pretty much allowed etc.

Mate the US think have guns is a good idea and millions of them voted for Donald Trump. I would not put much faith into what the Americans are doing.

 

[BlueAnorak]

This?

Mail, BBC news channel and Sky news too

 

[BLUEMATT23]

Thought the interview from Hancock yesterday was shambolic to be honest.
He's getting in a panic about the new variant when in fact he should be celebrating the fact that the vaccines work and we are getting back to normality. Then he says hug carefully, how exactly is that possible?
He also through the travel industry under the bus yet again.
The man is a clown.

 

[Rammy Blue]

Mate the US think have guns is a good idea and millions of them voted for Donald Trump. I would not put much faith into what the Americans are doing.

Lol, I know mate, but trust me the CDC don’t take any move lightly, it’s not worth the lawsuits.

 

[Fred_Quimby]

I have recently completed an antibody test for the NHS. There are 3 results - negative (no antibodies) - partial (some antibodies) - lots. I have had both jabs but showed negative. I know these tests are not 100% accurate but should I be concerned as this could be correct and I have no antibodies even after both jabs.

 

[MikeF]

Thought the interview from Hancock yesterday was shambolic to be honest.
He's getting in a panic about the new variant when in fact he should be celebrating the fact that the vaccines work and we are getting back to normality. Then he says hug carefully, how exactly is that possible?
He also through the travel industry under the bus yet again.
The man is a clown.

He gives in one hand and takes away with the other.

I get that confused with their messaging it’s unreal.

 

[BLUEMATT23]

He gives in one hand and takes away with the other.

I get that confused with their messaging it’s unreal.

Totally agree, to me throughout all of this and I don't want to over criticize as they have done a lot of good things, the vaccine rollout is arguably the best in the world and the furlough scheme has protected jobs (not all) - but for months they have been panicked by the scientists and by SAGE. SAGE have consistently got a lot of their forecasts and modelling completely wrong throughout. How they can be given any credence anymore I really don't know.

I really hope that in the review some of these doom merchants are bought to task and if necessary face consequences for scaring a lot of the population literally to death.

 

[artfuldodger]

I have recently completed an antibody test for the NHS. There are 3 results - negative (no antibodies) - partial (some antibodies) - lots. I have had both jabs but showed negative. I know these tests are not 100% accurate but should I be concerned as this could be correct and I have no antibodies even after both jabs.

How long after your second jab did you have it? Our family is on an antibody trial from university college London. After my first jab it showed no antibodies, next test was inconclusive, 3rd test 3 weeks after jab 2 showed S antibodies which can only come from a vaccine.

 

[ayrshire_blue]

Mail, BBC news channel and Sky news too

I think it's all from the same study though, where 3000 Health care workers in Delhi were given the AZ jab and only 3% later became infected during the study. That doesn't mean the vaccine was 97% effective against the Indian strain though and shouldn't be taken that way, as surely there's no way of knowing how many of those workers were exposed to it in that time? I don't argue it will have prevented some transmission but how much is difficult to prove. I just don't understand how that 3% figure can be reversed to reveal 97% efficacy when it doesn't necessarily mean anything like that.

Apologies if this is a different study or my interpretation is incorrect, this is just my understanding of it.

 

[BlueAnorak]

I think it's all from the same study though, where 3000 Health care workers in Delhi were given the AZ jab and only 3% later became infected during the study. That doesn't mean the vaccine was 97% effective against the Indian strain though and shouldn't be taken that way, as surely there's no way of knowing how many of those workers were exposed to it in that time? I don't argue it will have prevented some transmission but how much is difficult to prove. I just don't understand how that 3% figure can be reversed to reveal 97% efficacy when it doesn't necessarily mean anything like that.

Apologies if this is a different study or my interpretation is incorrect, this is just my understanding of it.

Hence why I was waiting for a link to the data.
Piss poor media reporting on matters scientific ever since T'internet became a thing for media organisations. There will be a link to a paper online somewhere.
It could be very good news though.