COVID-19: Vaccine/antidote and testing procedures Megathread [Mod Warning - Post #1]

hmmm

is_that_so wrote: »

The perception of them being rushed is down to how quickly these vaccines are getting through the phases.

Maybe people don't realise it's not actually a whiskey which will mature over time in a fine oak barrel?

The science is the science, and the trials are the trials, and we got a bit of a move on with them because there's a pandemic.

lawrencesummers

hmmm wrote: »

Maybe people don't realise it's not actually a whiskey which will mature over time in a fine oak barrel?

The science is the science, and the trials are the trials, and we got a bit of a move on with them because there's a pandemic.

And science allows medicines to improve over time, or to be removed from use because they follow scientific research and make improvements.

Russman

lawrencesummers wrote: »

But if you have the vaccine you don’t need to worry about the people that don’t.

Of course I do.
OK, some of these are reporting 95% efficacy which would be amazing, but what if one of them shows 70%, and that's the one a significant group of people are given because of their age ?
Granted the chances are low of catching something, but they'd be an awful lot lower if most of the population are also vaccinated.

JacksonHeightsOwn

tonycascarino wrote: »

Personally, I am not taking any of these rushed vaccines until I see the effects it has on other people first.

Do you mind me asking, have you had any other vaccines in your life, and if so, genuinely, how much of a background check did you do on them, ie, checking their efficiency, checking how many people where in the trials, numbers of people with side effects etc..... And please be honest.

hmmm

lawrencesummers wrote: »

And science allows medicines to improve over time, or to be removed from use because they follow scientific research and make improvements.

Most of us don't want to wait in perpetual lockdown for years until every crackpot on youtube has declared the vaccine safe. This is about balance of risk, and for most of us the risk from Covid and of giving Covid to family members outweighs whatever small risk exists in a vaccine. There's loads of bull**** about how long it takes a vaccine to be developed (the first vaccine took thousands of years, science gets faster - Moderna had a Covid vaccine in 2 days).

Hmmzis

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Your missing the point.
The possible adverse effects are in question.

Have a look at the people who suffered from taking Pandemrix where “ families were informed a vaccine was perfectly safe for use when health chiefs knew that it had not been fully tested”

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/health/swine-flu-vaccine-side-effects-so-bad-that-children-were-like-schizophrenics-37275895.html


It’s not unreasonable to be cautious.

It's missing the point that narcolepsy can and is being caused by H1N1 influenza. Since the Pandermix vaccine was an inactivated whole virus type, it contained the same antigens that caused the auto-immune reaction in a wild type infection. The questions of why only Pandermix had an increased incidence of the reaction is a bit fuzzy, but the deactivation process might be to blame as no other H1N1 vaccine had this issue.

The effect itself manifested shortly after the individuals would have been vaccinated, 2-6 weeks. That's the period when your body makes all those antibodies and trains T cells, that's the time where those auto-immune reactions can happen. There simply have been no known side effects discovered that happen after that process.
If the effect is apparent 2-6 weeks after vaccination, why was it discovered only much later? Because it was a very rare thing to happen and it was happening to people who were genetically predisposed to this condition, making it even harder to pick out a signal.

Micky 32

hmmm wrote: »

You seem to be absolutely sure that you are not at risk from Covid, a disease we know very little about or what its long-term impacts are going to be, and yet you think a vaccine which uses a tiny part of the virus and is being tested and monitored is highly dangerous and to be avoided.

You know i have been hearing the same BS from people all day today since the UK announcement. “ oh i won’t be taking it” bolloxogy. I fear f*****g never ending lockdowns and restrictions for years to come because of these selfish morons.:mad:

c.p.w.g.w

How have England approved the vaccine so fast?

I thought it would take a few months to trawl through the data of the studies?

What Username Guidelines

UK have had their first issue in that the vaccine comes in cases of 975 doses. There is an issue sending a single case to care homes which would result in wasted unused doses, so are attempting to see if MHRA will allow splitting the cases before delivery

lawrencesummers

Russman wrote: »

Of course I do.
OK, some of these are reporting 95% efficacy which would be amazing, but what if one of them shows 70%, and that's the one a significant group of people are given because of their age ?
Granted the chances are low of catching something, but they'd be an awful lot lower if most of the population are also vaccinated.

Do you want people to be forced to take the vaccine because of this?

lbj666

Hmmzis wrote: »

It's missing the point that narcolepsy can and is being caused by H1N1 influenza. Since the Pandermix vaccine was an inactivated whole virus type, it contained the same antigens that caused the auto-immune reaction in a wild type infection. The questions of why only Pandermix had an increased incidence of the reaction is a bit fuzzy, but the deactivation process might be to blame as no other H1N1 vaccine had this issue.

The effect itself manifested shortly after the individuals would have been vaccinated, 2-6 weeks. That's the period when your body makes all those antibodies and trains T cells, that's the time where those auto-immune reactions can happen. There simply have been no known side effects discovered that happen after that process.
If the effect is apparent 2-6 weeks after vaccination, why was it discovered only much later? Because it was a very rare thing to happen and it was happening to people who were genetically predisposed to this condition, making it even harder to pick out a signal.

- Correct me if i am wrong, but wasnt this actually what you call a "rushed vacine" also and it only when through Phase 1 trials and approved because of "exceptional circumstance"
- Something like 1:40,000 reported serious side effects globally mostly europe
- Its the one vacine plucked out as an example out of how many developed in recent history that have had no such issues?

speckle

What Username Guidelines wrote: »

UK have had their first issue in that the vaccine comes in cases of 975 doses. There is an issue sending a single case to care homes which would result in wasted unused doses, so are attempting to see if MHRA will allow splitting the cases before delivery

But surely the question is how big are those boxes are they for example suitcase sized or larger.

lawrencesummers

Hmmzis wrote: »

It's missing the point that narcolepsy can and is being caused by H1N1 influenza. Since the Pandermix vaccine was an inactivated whole virus type, it contained the same antigens that caused the auto-immune reaction in a wild type infection. The questions of why only Pandermix had an increased incidence of the reaction is a bit fuzzy, but the deactivation process might be to blame as no other H1N1 vaccine had this issue.

The effect itself manifested shortly after the individuals would have been vaccinated, 2-6 weeks. That's the period when your body makes all those antibodies and trains T cells, that's the time where those auto-immune reactions can happen. There simply have been no known side effects discovered that happen after that process.
If the effect is apparent 2-6 weeks after vaccination, why was it discovered only much later? Because it was a very rare thing to happen and it was happening to people who were genetically predisposed to this condition, making it even harder to pick out a signal.

If Pandemrix hasn’t caused the problem the cases wouldn’t have been settled out of court.

tobefrank321

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

How have England approved the vaccine so fast?

I thought it would take a few months to trawl through the data of the studies?

They worked with the vaccine makers and trial organisers to make sure they were receiving information regularly and concurrently with the trial.

So instead of being left with for example 5000 pages of information to read after the trial ended, they continually read the data coming in.

The UK are recognised as world leaders in vaccine authorizations which is why the the EU agency was located there. After Brexit it moved out of the UK - you'd worry there was a loss of competence in the current EU agency because of that.

Brexit has helped the UK approve this quickly but may delay the EU in approving it.

Sky King

lawrencesummers wrote: »

If Pandemrix hasn’t caused the problem the cases wouldn’t have been settled out of court.

I don't believe that. Settlement is more often than not purely a commercial decision - its cheaper to settle than to try prove they weren't in the wrong. At least that's the way it is for loads of insurance cases.

stephenjmcd

Jonathan Van Tam the deputy CMO in the UK says phase 1 rollout of the vaccine will eradicate 99% of Covid deaths.

JVT issues a passionate and compelling appeal to get the Covid jab and end social distancing Says: "If you want that dream to come true…you have to take the vaccine when it is offered to you"

Stark

Sky King wrote: »

I don't believe that. Settlement is more often than not purely a commercial decision - its cheaper to settle than to try prove they weren't in the wrong. At least that's the way it is for loads of insurance cases.

Especially in Ireland where for instance a simple personal injuries case could cost 40k+ to defend so usually more cost efficient to just pay out.

Russman

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Do you want people to be forced to take the vaccine because of this?

Absolutely not, I don’t think anyone should be forced to take a vaccine.

is_that_so

Stark wrote: »

Especially in Ireland where for instance a simple personal injuries case could cost 40k+ to defend so usually more cost efficient to just pay out.

The HSE regularly do it, and often like others, with no admission of guilt.

lbj666

tobefrank321 wrote: »

They worked with the vaccine makers and trial organisers to make sure they were receiving information regularly and concurrently with the trial.

So instead of being left with for example 5000 pages of information to read after the trial ended, they continually read the data coming in.

The UK are recognised as world leaders in vaccine authorizations which is why the the EU agency was located there. After Brexit it moved out of the UK - you'd worry there was a loss of competence in the current EU agency because of that.

Brexit has helped the UK approve this quickly but may delay the EU in approving it.

Not exactly

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/coronavirus-vaccine-brexit-pfizer-hancock_uk_5fc7936cc5b62d34ec88720a

lawrencesummers

Sky King wrote: »

I don't believe that. Settlement is more often than not purely a commercial decision - its cheaper to settle than to try prove they weren't in the wrong. At least that's the way it is for loads of insurance cases.

Sure.

Because costs can’t be awarded against the person who loses and global pharmaceutical companies work at the behest of local insurance companies.

I guess the Vaccine Damage Payment scheme doesn’t exist either in the UK.

A major study found 1 in 55,000 jabs given to 4-18 year olds lead to narcolepsy.

Now those numbers are low, and it’s a different vaccine, very low but my issue is that nobody is playing devils advocate to this vaccine and saying that there are reasons to be cautious.

It’s full steam ahead get the jab and party on.

lawrencesummers

Stark wrote: »

Especially in Ireland where for instance a simple personal injuries case could cost 40k+ to defend so usually more cost efficient to just pay out.

Pharma companies have in house legal teams, so it wouldn’t cost them anything extra, or very very little.

lawrencesummers

tobefrank321 wrote: »

They worked with the vaccine makers and trial organisers to make sure they were receiving information regularly and concurrently with the trial.

So instead of being left with for example 5000 pages of information to read after the trial ended, they continually read the data coming in.

The UK are recognised as world leaders in vaccine authorizations which is why the the EU agency was located there. After Brexit it moved out of the UK - you'd worry there was a loss of competence in the current EU agency because of that.

Brexit has helped the UK approve this quickly but may delay the EU in approving it.

Something that is happening in a month has caused the UK medical authorities to approve this now while something that is happening in a month is making the European authorities authorise it shortly.

Sure.

Sky King

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Now those numbers are low, and it’s a different vaccine, very low but my issue is that nobody is playing devils advocate to this vaccine and saying that there are reasons to be cautious.

.

Loads of people have said that, consistently, since the vaccines were first proposed.

lawrencesummers

Sky King wrote: »

Loads of people have said that, consistently, since the vaccines were first proposed.

Nobody sane or nobody in the mainstream has been saying it recently, it’s all drive on and roll out.

Sky King

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Nobody sane or nobody in the mainstream has been saying it recently, it’s all drive on and roll out.

That's because the question has been answered. When the vaccines are first proposed, a lot of sane qualified scientists ask if they're safe. Then when they're submitted for approval another load of sane qualified independent scientists validate the result. Then they're approved. The question has been answered. Drive on, and roll out.

lawrencesummers

Sky King wrote: »

That's because the question has been answered. When the vaccines are first proposed, a lot of sane qualified scientists ask if they're safe. Then when they're submitted for approval another load of sane qualified independent scientists validate the result. Then they're approved. The question has been answered. Drive on, and roll out.

The same sane qualified scientists that approved every other medicine I suppose...

ShineOn7

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Nobody sane or nobody in the mainstream has been saying it recently, it’s all drive on and roll out.

Every single argument you've put up has been calmly and intelligently counterpointed and explained to you with facts. Real, actual facts

I'm not quite sure what else can be said to you tbh

Sheep2020

ShineOn7 wrote: »

Every single argument you've put up has been calmly and intelligently counterpointed and explained to you with facts. Real, actual facts

I'm not quite sure what else can be said to you tbh

Real facts by whom?

Board's scientific advisors like yourself, hhmm, hmmsss, el seuno?

Who all qualified as boards.ie approved virologists in March :pac:

Everyone here is reading articles off reddit Covid19 thread and plagiarising articles, acting like they understand it

No one here has any facts

Bored in work talking ****e, they'd be shamed in seconds if they had to talk to real experts in the field, acting like big time charlie's here

ShineOn7

All aboard!

Health Minister says Covid-19 vaccine should be free as nine freezer trucks arrive in Ireland

https://www.thejournal.ie/freezers-covid-19-vaccine-5286334-Dec2020/

Excuse the Journal link and, as ever, avert your eyes from the comments section

There lies crazy people