Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Off Topic Thread 5.0

Options
1…169170172174175…291

Comments

  • Options
    #5132
    Neil3030
    Registered Users Posts: 16,996 ✭✭✭✭Neil3030


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    I guess it's like a guilty plea in a criminal case. They will reduce the sentence, but you won't get off.

    So I heard before that if you're accused of libel or slander (can't remember which) sometimes you can get off if you just apologize? Is that more in the Irish legal context?


  • Options
    #5133
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,402 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Neil3030 wrote: »
    So I heard before that if you're accused of libel or slander (can't remember which) sometimes you can get off if you just apologize? Is that more in the Irish legal context?

    Its a civil case, so they can drop the proceedings and sometimes all people want is an apology. But it doesn't get you off anything by right.


  • Options
    #5134
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    If that information from Germany turns out to be accurate that is going to be a pretty big scandal.


  • Options
    #5135
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,402 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Deleted User wrote: »
    If that information from Germany turns out to be accurate that is going to be a pretty big scandal.

    How could they possibly know? Strikes me as utter nonsense on the face of it and its dangerous to report it unless they are sure otherwise.


  • Options
    #5136
    Squidgy Black
    Registered Users Posts: 21,605 ✭✭✭✭Squidgy Black


    Neil3030 wrote: »
    So I heard before that if you're accused of libel or slander (can't remember which) sometimes you can get off if you just apologize? Is that more in the Irish legal context?

    An apology on it's own could be considered a settlement in some cases, but because Dominion are claiming that it's cost them financially, they likely wouldn't be obliged to accept it as a standalone and would probably pursue financial retribution.

    With an apology, you might only be able to claim for financial damages that you could prove were occured up until the point of the apology, but without one they could potentially project financial damages for the future due to the fact Trump supporters will continue to bad-mouth them without the allegations being retracted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5137
    Bazzo
    Registered Users Posts: 7,047 ✭✭✭Bazzo


    aloooof wrote: »
    And that decision could come back to bite them in the ass if there's any truth to this:

    https://twitter.com/newschambers/status/1353802566623227906

    Leaked from German government officials shortly after we find out that AstraZeneca are not fulfilling their deal with the EU...

    Is there any chance there's some real house of cards politicking going on, or have I got an overly active imagination?


  • Options
    #5138
    Neil3030
    Registered Users Posts: 16,996 ✭✭✭✭Neil3030


    Mate of mine reckons the 8% could be a misunderstanding - 8% of their clinical sample (~1400/11k) were over 55.

    Strikes me as something AZ could very quickly straighten out with a press release though.


  • Options
    #5139
    Former Former Former
    Registered Users Posts: 5,506 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    How could they possibly know? Strikes me as utter nonsense on the face of it and its dangerous to report it unless they are sure otherwise.

    It is being reported as confidential sources from within the German government. I don't know whether it's accurate or not but such people would know by now.

    https://twitter.com/washingtonski/status/1353796533246976000


  • Options
    #5140
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Bazzo wrote: »
    Leaked from German government officials shortly after we find out that AstraZeneca are not fulfilling their deal with the EU...

    Is there any chance there's some real house of cards politicking going on, or have I got an overly active imagination?

    Maybe. The EMA haven't certified it yet, but if it turns out that efficacy in over 65's is minimal then AZ are in trouble and so is the UK vaccination effort.

    The moment the UK Government came out and said the pfizer approval was only possible because of brexit, the vaccination effort became political.

    If German officials are spinning yarns then that's worse again as people will refuse the Oxford vaccine.

    I know who I trust the least in all this - but it's a matter of waiting for more data at this stage. If there has been shenanigans here then the fallout could be significant.


  • Options
    #5141
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Neil3030 wrote: »
    So is that how it works - once you show damages (financial) it's irrelevant if they apologize?

    They have to show damages, which is actually quite difficult. Then they have to show that he made the comments with malice intent (ie he knew it was false and did it to cause harm). Then the comments have to have been published in a way that they are not protected, so litigation and political speech is protected under all sorts of settings.

    They could well do all of that, but wouldn’t be surprised if it doesn’t go that far. He is probably judgement proof anyway.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5142
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Neil3030 wrote: »
    Mate of mine reckons the 8% could be a misunderstanding - 8% of their clinical sample (~1400/11k) were over 55.

    Strikes me as something AZ could very quickly straighten out with a press release though.

    AZ are masterminds of straightening out mistakes they’ve completely unnecessarily created for themselves at this point


  • Options
    #5143
    Neil3030
    Registered Users Posts: 16,996 ✭✭✭✭Neil3030


    There's something to this, folks. The study that reported AZ efficacy is a complete dooh-dooh show:

    Full article here: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32661-1/fulltext

    For some reason dosages got mixed up. One group of their sample got a low dose/standard dose (two shots) (They are labelled LD/SD in the tables below). The other got a standard/standard (also two shots) (SD/SD below).

    Somehow, the LD/SD group efficacy (90%) was higher than the SD/SD (62%)

    Reason might be in the first table: nobody over 55 was in LD/SD.

    My hunch is the German govt people have access to the larger study that continued on in Brazil after these data were reported.

    540967.png

    540968.png


  • Options
    #5144
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,402 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    The difference between the half dose-full dose and the full dose-full dose cohort was well documented.

    I'm not sure what extra information the german govt have given that there is no widespread rollout of the AZ vaccine there. Strikes me on the surface as bad stats at best.


  • Options
    #5145
    Buer
    Registered Users Posts: 24,179 ✭✭✭✭Buer


    Neil3030 wrote: »
    Somehow, the LD/SD group efficacy (90%) was higher than the SD/SD (62%)

    Reason might be in the first table: nobody over 55 was in LD/SD.

    The initial lower dose triggers the immune response without over stimulating it allowing the body to adjust and react to a standard dose much more effectively thereafter. It was analysed a lot at the time of the press release.

    Am I right in saying this was reported in Bild? Isn't that the German equivalent of The Sun i.e. a jingoistic rag?


  • Options
    #5146
    Neil3030
    Registered Users Posts: 16,996 ✭✭✭✭Neil3030


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    The difference between the half dose-full dose and the full dose-full dose cohort was well documented.

    I'm not sure what extra information the german govt have given that there is no widespread rollout of the AZ vaccine there. Strikes me on the surface as bad stats at best.

    Probably data from studies COV003 (Brazil) or COV005 (South Africa).

    If the latter, may not be too alarming news, as there had been some suspicion the SA variant would be most resistant to the vaccine.


  • Options
    #5147
    Neil3030
    Registered Users Posts: 16,996 ✭✭✭✭Neil3030


    Buer wrote: »
    The initial lower dose triggers the immune response without over stimulating it allowing the body to adjust and react to a standard dose much more effectively thereafter. It was analysed a lot at the time of the press release.

    But was it discussed that nobody over 55 was in that group?


  • Options
    #5148
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,402 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Neil3030 wrote: »
    Probably data from studies COV003 (Brazil) or COV005 (South Africa).

    If the latter, may not be too alarming news, as there had been some suspicion the SA variant would be most resistant to the vaccine.

    But why would Germany have extra data on this?


  • Options
    #5149
    Neil3030
    Registered Users Posts: 16,996 ✭✭✭✭Neil3030


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    But why would Germany have extra data on this?

    Are the results already published? Even in a pre-print?


  • Options
    #5150
    Neil3030
    Registered Users Posts: 16,996 ✭✭✭✭Neil3030


    Well the press machine is in operation anyway:

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1388919/oxford-vaccine-oxford-astraZeneca-covid-vaccine-germany-over-65-efficacy


  • Options
    #5151
    Bazzo
    Registered Users Posts: 7,047 ✭✭✭Bazzo


    FWIW Chambers has now deleted his tweet about this, and AstraZeneca have released a strong statement rejecting the claims.

    He may have just reflected and want to be very careful about possibly undermining faith in a vaccine, I suppose.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5152
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,402 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Neil3030 wrote: »
    Are the results already published? Even in a pre-print?

    German politicians (who appear to be the source of this) will have less info than the EMA, particularly given that Germany has not rolled out the AZ vaccine. Even then you would need weeks to identify any such trend. They are also, clearly, not a medical body. In essence, there is a large reason to suspect they are talking through their hoop and it is insanely dangerous to propagate the story.


  • Options
    #5153
    Neil3030
    Registered Users Posts: 16,996 ✭✭✭✭Neil3030


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    German politicians (who appear to be the source of this) will have less info than the EMA, particularly given that Germany has not rolled out the AZ vaccine. Even then you would need weeks to identify any such trend. They are also, clearly, not a medical body. In essence, there is a large reason to suspect they are talking through their hoop and it is insanely dangerous to propagate the story.

    EMA might also have the info but just run a tighter ship.


  • Options
    #5154
    Former Former Former
    Registered Users Posts: 5,506 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    German politicians (who appear to be the source of this) will have less info than the EMA, particularly given that Germany has not rolled out the AZ vaccine. Even then you would need weeks to identify any such trend. They are also, clearly, not a medical body. In essence, there is a large reason to suspect they are talking through their hoop and it is insanely dangerous to propagate the story.

    Well, the EMA is made up of committees and working parties which are populated by experts from the member states. Germany is, unsurprisingly, heavily represented on these and their national vaccines centre, the Paul Ehrlich Institute, is recognised as an absolute world authority on questions like this. So there are plenty of German people who would have seen the data first hand and be well able to interpret it.

    Now, how the info would get to someone who might leak it to a newpaper is another question... but it is possible.


  • Options
    #5155
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,402 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Neil3030 wrote: »
    EMA might also have the info but just run a tighter ship.

    Then it will come out when they are ready to do so and the vaccine won't be authorised for the EU. Or its bull**** and ****loads of damage has been caused.

    I am not aiming this at you, I understand the desire to talk about it, but I have serious reservations about the newspaper that ran the story. Some German govt officials is not a good source for this.


  • Options
    #5156
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,402 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Former Former Former wrote: »
    Well, the EMA is made up of committees and working parties which are populated by experts from the member states. Germany is, unsurprisingly, heavily represented on these and their national vaccines centre, the Paul Ehrlich Institute, is recognised as an absolute world authority on questions like this. So there are plenty of German people who would have seen the data first hand and be well able to interpret it.

    Now, how the info would get to someone who might leak it to a newpaper is another question... but it is possible.
    “Our sources, including members of the government coalition, spoke on the condition of anonymity so we cannot source the story ‘on the record’ nor can we make public any underlying data.”

    Members of the govt coalition are utterly irrelevant to such a story as far as I am concerned. The ability for people to wildly misinterpret stats and data is insane. Hell, I don't trust most doctors to understand stats. Your sources are the scientists/epidemiologists looking at the data or feck off.


  • Options
    #5157
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    I guess the problem is that there’s probably a vast difference between people who are capable of interpreting the data properly and people who are willing to leak something that damaging, or even comprehend the potential ramifications...


  • Options
    #5158
    Neil3030
    Registered Users Posts: 16,996 ✭✭✭✭Neil3030


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    Then it will come out when they are ready to do so and the vaccine won't be authorised for the EU. Or its bull**** and ****loads of damage has been caused.

    I am not aiming this at you, I understand the desire to talk about it, but I have serious reservations about the newspaper that ran the story. Some German govt officials is not a good source for this.

    Don't worry, we're still friends.

    I just hadn't seen that sampling bias until tonight, which is what I'm most intrigued about.


  • Options
    #5159
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,745 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    Watching Its A Sin on Channel 4. A really good show, but f
    cccckkkk is it heavy.


  • Options
    #5160
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,402 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Neil3030 wrote: »
    I just hadn't seen that sampling bias until tonight, which is what I'm most intrigued about.

    Ah ok. I read about it back when there was the debate about the full dose-full dose vs half dose-full dose. 70% is still plenty good enough for a vaccine anyway, but the fact it was 90 something % effective with the other regimen was almost definitely an artefact of the sample group. It wasn't a deliberate study, it was an accident so it should be treated with a bit of trepidation for sure.

    On equal points, there is no way there has been a proper study on over-70s to show it is only 8% effective and only some German politicians were willing to reveal it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5161
    Neil3030
    Registered Users Posts: 16,996 ✭✭✭✭Neil3030


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    Ah ok. I read about it back when there was the debate about the full dose-full dose vs half dose-full dose. 70% is still plenty good enough for a vaccine anyway, but the fact it was 90 something % effective with the other regimen was almost definitely an artefact of the sample group. It wasn't a deliberate study, it was an accident so it should be treated with a bit of trepidation for sure.

    On equal points, there is no way there has been a proper study on over-70s to show it is only 8% effective and only some German politicians were willing to reveal it.

    And it's just such an unusual stat, too. 8% would almost certainly be within a confidence interval that would cover 0, i.e., no evidence of an effect.

    My money is on a misread of the geezer proportion of the sample outright.


Advertisement