COVID-19 — Coronavirus

[Churchlawtonblue]

Yes met him a few times. Very sound man. They are good people.

I can certainly vouch for that. They are great to work for.

 

[Ric]

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?

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

What do you think about Fred Done and his Salboy property arm? I was his Account Manager many years ago (when he was just North West based) and he treated me really well, not seen him for years but he is one of the most quietly determined characters I ever met, not bad for a Salford lad who started off with one betting shop in his home City.

We do alot of work for them. They are great to work for.

 

[domalino]

I never once said they did. How are you interpreting it in that way? You're more intelligent than this. Don't be disingenuous man, it's unfair. I'm trying to judge based of what we categorically know, not presumptions.

My point was that they don't (currently) fall in line with the Swiss OR the UK. All we know is they're reviewing the data. They might decide they need more. They might not. Just because they haven't said anything yet it doesn't mean they have a stance either way. That's a pretty fair conclusion isn't it?

Simple question - do you think pre-existing conditions are unimportant?

You have absolutely no idea how important or unimportant breaking down all the pre-existing conditions of the 43,000 people in the trial are. You don't.

You've seen a line in an article about them and decided that suddenly you know more about how important they are than the MHRA.

And then you have the gall to talk about being disingenuous.

Also we have had updates from the EMA and FDA yesterday about their progress, and both have said they need more time to analyse the data. That is fundamentally different to saying you don't have all the date needed to make a decision. So yes, we do know the EMA and FDA are in disagreement with the Swiss because if they needed more data, they would have mentioned it when explaining why they haven't approved the vaccine yet.

 

[Tonster]

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?

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!

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

BBC 5 Live were saying there was optimism amongst the scientific community that the Oxford vaccine would be approved by Christmas. I think they are also going for EMA clearance who don’t seem to be put off by negative briefings from the States.

I think having the BioNtech / Pfizer vaccine approved puts us in a stronger position if we have to negotiate for additional vaccines, without getting exploited.

the AZ vaccine is so cheap anyway. non profit.

 

[Healdplace]

The REALLY good news about the now approved vaccine and the reason it is difficult to deploy is the unique way it was created using very novel techniques that were impossible for science to do even a few years ago.

If this works as well as it looks there is no reason that it will only be significant for drugs against viruses - it may actually be able to be adapted to find solutions to some of the things medicine has a really hard time combatting. And potentially other things we cannot guess right now.

This could be a great step not just against this disease but for the entire human race. It is that big a deal. Because - unlike the Oxford vaccine - important as that will be if approved given its cheap costs and ease of deployment - the one now approved is a big scientific breakthrough on a par with discovering X Rays or Penicillin almost by chance without knowing at the start how they would revolutionise the world.

The scientists are so excited about this not only because of this pandemic but because it proves the methodology and opens the door to so many other life saving possibilities. It is on a par with finding a cure for cancer.

 

[M18CTID]

the absolute defence of MHRA is interesting - that's the EU and the US that have now questioned the UK's speed. Now, i dont know either way, but the jumping to the MHRA's defence is curious. But i suppose we will see in time.

I don’t think it’s an absolute defence. They’re (the US and EU) are implying that the MHRA have cut corners. If that’s the case then fine but show us the evidence rather than spouting off. It just sounds like sour grapes to me because the UK has approved it first. Personally, if the Pfizer vaccine is good to go then I’d rather see every country get to roll it out as soon as possible rather than everyone trying to Top Trump each other. If the US and/or the EU delay their approval for too long, there will be a lot of rightfully pissed off people in those countries when they see the UK infection rates dropping as the effects of the vaccine roll out start to take hold

 

[Tim of the Oak]

I have read a few articles and the USA / FDA tend to approve (or not) vaccines around scheduled meetings. They may not this time and could give emergency clearances but it is a politically loaded issue. 78% of Americans in one poll were found to think the process for assessing and agreeing a vaccine(s) was politically driven. Therefore, approving the vaccine in advance of a scheduled meeting rather than afterwards (Pfizer/BioNtech being discussed on 10th December and Moderna on the 17th) might further undermine public confidence. Time will tell.

As long as the MHRA followed their framework for approval (as they did) then that’s the job done.

 

[twosips]

This cutting corners because this vaccine has been created and approved in record time does not take into account three things that are very different this time than has ever been true:

1: A GLOBAL pandemic that became one within weeks not months or years meant almost every wealthy nation put money into this to try to save their economy from tanking. Meaning a ginormous budget never seen before.

2: A GLOBAL market for any successful vaccine that meant drug companies had a huge incentive to invest too because the rewards from global sales were gigantic unlike with a Far East virus or an African one that might never go any further.

3: The very high infectiveness of this virus and how it spread so fast taking new countries almost daily made testing and trialling much easier than with most diseases because these trials require a base limit of cases you must wait to collate - possibly for years - and if you only have to wait weeks instead of months or years to collate that data then the process is sped up in ways that it usually is not.

Not a conspiracy or corner cutting. Just a very insidious disease with a global imperative to resolve asap.

I don't think we're cutting corners btw. I don't think its fair either that being naturally curious or asking questions is seen as a precursor to conspiracy theorists. Science is literally built on asking questions and I don't think its unreasonable for anyone to ponder why the UK and the Swiss could see things differently.

My brother is a flat earther/bill gates chip type conspiracy theorist. It has driven me mad for the past 15 years to the point where we've come to blows. I cannot stand it all. I couldn't be further from that as I try and lead my life based on logic and quantifiable truths. I'm just a naturally inquisitive person. If leading medical professionals are asking questions about data then there's nowt wrong with having a think about it too. I trust the MHRA, but I certainly don't trust people are perfect and I'm definitely curious as to why two countries would view things differently. I think that's fair enough.

 

[Tim of the Oak]

the AZ vaccine is so cheap anyway. non profit.

Yes that’s right. I was thinking of buying from other manufacturers if needs be eg some Companies are developing booster vaccines

 

[twosips]

You have absolutely no idea how important or unimportant breaking down all the pre-existing conditions of the 43,000 people in the trial are. You don't.

You've seen a line in an article about them and decided that suddenly you know more about how important they are than the MHRA.

And then you have the gall to talk about being disingenuous.

Also we have had updates from the EMA and FDA yesterday about their progress, and both have said they need more time to analyse the data. That is fundamentally different to saying you don't have all the date needed to make a decision. So yes, we do know the EMA and FDA are in disagreement with the Swiss because if they needed more data, they would have mentioned it when explaining why they haven't approved the vaccine yet.

Bloody hell man. I didn't at any point claim any of these things. I was only sharing an article and wondering why as it seemed pretty damn reasonable request. Never once claimed either side was right or wrong. Why are you being so damn aggressive and defensive and putting words into my mouth?!

Edit - trying to shut down someone who asks genuinely curious questions by asserting they're being arrogant is a shite take man. Totally unfair.

 

[M18CTID]

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.

Fair enough

 

[Healdplace]

Twosips - My post was not contradicting yours and I agree those questions should be asked.

I was just talking generally about the widespread concern out there over the speed with which this has happened as necessarily meaning some corners were cut.

Of course, any doubts that they were need investigating.

 

[twosips]

Twosips - My post was not contradicting yours and I agree those questions should be asked.

I was just talking generally about the concern over the speed with which this has happened as necessarily meaning some corners were cut.

Of course, any doubts that they were need investigating.

No worries mate. Appreciate your updates as ever!

 

[M18CTID]

I have read a few articles and the USA / FDA tend to approve (or not) vaccines around scheduled meetings. They may not this time and could give emergency clearances but it is a politically loaded issue. 78% of Americans in one poll were found to think the process for assessing and agreeing a vaccine(s) was politically driven. Therefore, approving the vaccine in advance of a scheduled meeting rather than afterwards (Pfizer/BioNtech being discussed on 10th December and Moderna on the 17th) might further undermine public confidence. Time will tell.

As long as the MHRA followed their framework for approval (as they did) then that’s the job done.

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!

 

[domalino]

Bloody hell man. I didn't at any point claim any of these things. I was only sharing an article and wondering why as it seemed pretty damn reasonable request. Never once claimed either side was right or wrong. Why are you being so damn aggressive and defensive and putting words into my mouth?!

You have repeatedly claimed that asking for data on all preexisting conditions for the 43,000 people in the study is "an incredibly reasonable and normal thing" or "a ridiculously normal thing".

That's based on absolutely no knowledge, just an assumption that if the Swiss demand it, it must be normal.

Given we know the MHRA didn't require that data, there is a direct implication that you think the MHRA is not being reasonable or normal by approving without it.

You've also assumed the FDA and EMA side with the Swiss and claimed the UK is an outlier for not requiring that data which is completely made up. What we know is the FDA and EMA have never said they need more data, so actually the Swiss are the outliers.

 

[purplenose]

The REALLY good news about the now approved vaccine and the reason it is difficult to deploy is the unique way it was created using very novel techniques that were impossible for science to do even a few years ago.

If this works as well as it looks there is no reason that it will only be significant for drugs against viruses - it may actually be able to be adapted to find solutions to some of the things medicine has a really hard time combatting. And potentially other things we cannot guess right now.

This could be a great step not just against this disease but for the entire human race. It is that big a deal. Because - unlike the Oxford vaccine - important as that will be if approved given its cheap costs and ease of deployment - the one now approved is a big scientific breakthrough on a par with discovering X Rays or Penicillin almost by chance without knowing at the start how they would revolutionise the world.

The scientists are so excited about this not only because of this pandemic but because it proves the methodology and opens the door to so many other life saving possibilities. It is on a par with finding a cure for cancer.

Understandable under the current circumstances but I do wonder what advances will have been made due to this virus and though little consolation to those who have been lost or anyone else at this moment in time its quite possible that their legacy will be many many times more lives saved in the future than lost due to this horrible pandemic.

 

[artfuldodger]

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?

The only bit that cover this is the bit about going out of your area. But its avoid, rather than must not.

avoid travelling outside of your area, including for overnight stays other than where necessary, such as for work, education

 

[twosips]

You have repeatedly claimed that asking for data on all preexisting conditions for the 43,000 people in the study is "an incredibly reasonable and normal thing" or "a ridiculously normal thing".


Given we know the MHRA didn't require that data, there is a clear implication that you think the MHRA is not being reasonable or normal by not requiring it.

You actually have no idea if it's incredibly reasonable or normal to demand that from a vaccine trial.

Well, it certainly seems like a reasonable thing. Scientists are incredibly thorough and all the papers and general discourse I've been reading throughout this pandemic about treatments always seemed to take into account these things. So i guess i presumed vaccines would do the same. Why wouldn't they? Shrug.

If it isn't important, fair enough? Is it? Do you know categorically if it is or not? If you do, I apologise. If it isn't important, why is it not important in the vaccine studies? Genuinely curious as to why it was brought up in discussions around potential therapeutic treatments but possibly isn't important for vaccines. I honestly won't claim to know otherwise as unsurprisingly I've never approved a vaccine. I just think it's interesting and I'd love to know why some very intelligent people disagree with others. I'm not trying to be wrong or right. I have no opinion. I just want to *know* more.

I don't think there's anything wrong with these questions. I certainly won't be the only person who wonders about this kind of thing. I don't see what's wrong with that. I don't really know who to trust these days and who can really blame me given people are incredibly frustrating? Having said that, I have zero reason to doubt the MHRA, at the same time I have zero reason to doubt the Swiss. So yeah...questions.

Oh and finally mate, I never once categorically claimed that it IS a normal thing to do, did I? I asked a question each time. I said surely it is? Words matter. I kept asking whether it is - never once claimed it is, because I simply don't know. I wouldn't claim otherwise. You've been misinterpreting me constantly. I understand how that's happened but you've not read my posts properly.