Coronavirus (2021) thread

[roubaixtuesday]

is that doing it properly with 2 doses in 3 weeks though?

No, that's quoted as at least 7 days after the second dose.

But the trial data showed no change in rate of infection after the second dose anyway, so it doesn't mean there is any concern vs one dose strategy either.

What it does mean, though, if that twitter thread is accurate, is:

Country average infection rate 1000 per million per day (Ourworldindata figure)

Vaccinated group figure ~160 per million over several days (that thread doesn't say the period)

Which means a back of the fag packet calculation of initial real world efficacy is at least 85%, maybe a lot higher. Also and even more importantly confirms the absence of any severe disease whatever. And all in the most vulnerable section of society.

Obviously these are just my amateur scribblings, but it strikes me as very, very good news indeed, better than I would have dared hope.

 

[Del_Bosque]

Filing this one under bitter agenda driven bollocks

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Brexit might actually help Britain here

And yet again, we have done nothing that EU membership precluded us from.

As confirmed by the head of the MHRA.

 

[twosips]

Filing this one under bitter agenda driven bollocks

Yeah I saw that earlier. Nearly shared it on here but thought i'd get abuse. Curious to see what that's based on though. Bit odd! Midly concerning though as apparently its come from Handelsblatt, not Bild. They'are seemingly more reliable, so would be good to have this cleared up I guess.

 

[Del_Bosque]

Yeah I saw that earlier. Nearly shared it on here but thought i'd get abuse. Curious to see what that's based on though. Bit odd!

I don’t see why they’d have been kicking off all day about not getting their ordered doses if it can’t be used in over 65’s

why would they want it for anyone else

 

[Invisible Man's Bandage]

If it happens it will be amazing, nobody was disputing that, the key though is supply, and nobody on here knows we can meet it, hopefully we can, but Hancock hinted tonight that it wasn't guaranteed that the supply could keep up with demand.

They have been saying that since the roll out began but they are adding capacity weekly. Another 32 large sites open this week so you would think that if supply was constrained then they wouldn't expand capacity.

My feeling is that for once they want to over deliver rather than promise the earth and not. I also think they don't want other European countries to know how much supply we actually have so that they can't pressure manufacturers to divert supplies to them.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Filing this one under bitter agenda driven bollocks

I would wait and see. The EMA, unlike the MHRA to date, publishes their evaluation, so you'll be able to see it soon enough, due 29th.

I think it's highly unlikely the EU would be kicking off about supply if they had efficacy concerns.

I really hope the clinical evaluation is not muddied by Brexit one way or the other, it would be disastrous.

 

[inbetween]

Filing this one under bitter agenda driven bollocks

Why would they consider at all let alone consider approving a vaccine with 8% efficacy to the most vulnerable population?

What an utterly bizarre article.

 

[Del_Bosque]

And yet again, we have done nothing that EU membership precluded us from.

As confirmed by the head of the MHRA.

Wouldn’t we have been obliged if not legally bound, to have joined the EU vaccine procurement programme?

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Wouldn’t we have been obliged if not legally bound, to have joined the EU vaccine procurement programme?

No. We would have an option to join which we were free not to.