ACitizenErased wrote: » Saving 95% of the world is a fine achievement
Tenzor07 wrote: » Yes, it's great that a new medicine can kill more people that Covid has killed all year..
ACitizenErased wrote: » Who's saying people won't be compensated? A company not being able to be sued means sweet f* all about compensation.
Tenzor07 wrote: » Who assumes legal liability for deaths and injuries due to a company's new drug? Governments, i.e. the taxpayer?
Tenzor07 wrote: » Very basic simple fact for you here, in a race by Governments and big pharma to bring out a new vaccine based on new methods/technology and tested on a very small number of humans is rushed to market in a fraction of the time as would be normal and that causes an adverse reaction in say 0.5% of a couple of billion people who take it therefore killing 10's of thousands, do you think that's acceptable they can't face punishment?
ACitizenErased wrote: » You should write a book. Your hyperbole is impressive.
Tenzor07 wrote: » You should read a book... And one which says you can question the reasons for/against taking unproven medicines from a company that has legal indemnity against being sued for adverse reactions.. I'm more than happy to let whoever wants to get the first of many of these newly developed medicines injected into them...
Gael23 wrote: » Some more bad news on the treatment front https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/1002/1169088-covid-medicine-review/
Tenzor07 wrote: » Careful or you'll be labelled as an "Anti-Vaxxer" or a "Facebook Doctor", you're not allowed to question whether a new medicine should be taken without hesitation as soon as it becomes available..
Van.Bosch wrote: » If Trump has been given this newly approved cocktail, it either works which means they have a belief it helps as a cure. Or else he is in a bad way and are rolling the dice...
hmmm wrote: » Remdesivir has always had kidney issues listed as a potential side-effect. We know that because it has been tested properly. It's not given to every patient, but for certain patients the risk of Covid outweighs the risk of side-effects.
ABU DHABI — A team of researchers from Khalifa University has developed a portable COVID-19 testing kit, no larger than your average smartphone. The new kit is both portable and can deliver the results in 45 minutes only. Dr. Anas Alazzam, associate professor of mechanical engineering and member of the System on Chip Center (SOCC) is the primary investigator for the project with Dr. Habiba AlSafar, director of Khalifa University Center for Biotechnology and associate professor of genetics and molecular biology, as co-principal investigator. The research team includes the postdoctoral researchers Dr. Waqas Waheed and Dr. Sueda Saylan, along with research associate Hussein Kannout. While PCR testing is always highly accurate, and the gold standard for detecting viruses, it can be complex to use. The researchers at Khalifa Universit used the Loop-mediated Isothermal Amplification method (AMP) to provide a rapid, sensitive, and specific detection of the COVID-19 virus. It is faster than the conventional PCR method and uses primers that target two specific regions of the viral RNA. The majority of PCR methods rely on thermal cycling where the reactants are exposed to repeated cycles of heating and cooling to start the RNA replication process. While laboratory PCR tests require a programmable thermocycler, LAMP can be carried out with a simple heat block, making it much more amenable to portable testing. As complicated as this sounds, it’s all completed within the device and needs minimal knowledge to operate. For the Khalifa Universit testing kit, there is no need for any sophisticated equipment as the kit performs COVID-19 detection directly from a patient’s swab. A simple color change shows the result: pink for negative, yellow for positive. Currently, in the clinical validation stage, this testing kit can detect active infections in 45 minutes, meaning it can be used in rapid testing while being cost-effective at the same time. When the coronavirus pandemic is over, the kits remain useful, as they can be used with any virus detecting primer. The LAMP method will still replicate the RNA to make it testable and then the sample can be tested with a reagent looking for the influenza virus, for example. Primers to detect an infectious agent can be produced quickly once the viral sequence is known, so if a new virus were to emerge, this PCR test from the team at Khalifa University would be able to detect it.
Tenzor07 wrote: » People deserve to be compensated in the event of injury due to adverse reactions to a companies products.
Gael23 wrote: » So there won’t be large gatherings or offices reopening anytime in the foreseeable future?
D.Q wrote: » DiD u nO dAt bIg pHarMa bAd??? I sAw iT On fAceBOok WaKe uP $hEEpLe Genuinely baffled by the arrogance of some people. Absolute chancers with no experience in science or medicine, have done a few crash courses in Facebook research and think they know better than the best and brightest minds in the field. And every single one of them that have posted on here each seem to think that their own hot take is unique, that they are the only ones that can see through the fake news. Mental. I'd love to know who they are in real life. Curious as to what they do for a living, how they spend their time, who they socialise with. Because there's no way that pig headed ignorance doesn't permeate into everything they do.
Gael23 wrote: » It needs to be free for everyone to ensure uptake
Tenzor07 wrote: » Why would it be free? Companies aren't charities at the end of the day. The U.S, Russian, Chinese governments and more are paying billions of dollars plus giving an insurance policy to all the manufacturers. With the numbers of people on here who will run down to the nearest clinic with their sleeves rolled up to take the first vaccine, they better hope that it gives greater than 50% protection...otherwise you're into the next vaccine costing the state billions more....
Gael23 wrote: » They can charge governments but people need every incentive to get this vaccine
Tenzor07 wrote: » So who's going to pay for it? No increase of income tax this budget but there has to be an emergency one when the first vaccine pops up for sale, how will it be funded if not by an increase in tax? Borrowing?
hmmm wrote: » Economies are losing a fortune every day this pandemic continues, Governments all over the world are going to give out the vaccine for free to anyone who wants it. You're going to have to find another reason to argue against vaccination because this one is pretty weak. I seem to remember the Astra Zeneca one is less than 10 euros a head, and some of others are around 25 euro a head - it's trivial for this country.
