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

iguana wrote: »

An enormous amount of people have autoimmune conditions. I get psoriasis on my scalp when I'm under extreme stress. I had tiny endometrial growths on my right ovary. Both are auto-immune conditions but I'd be very surprised if I get called up any earlier for a vaccine because of them.

I have no idea how they intend rolling out vaccinations, but I would imagine that after medical personnel and those over 65, others at high risk would be the next priority regardless of age.
The only people who could determine who those are will be their G.P.s. It would appear to make sense, to me anyway, that they would be next to prioritise who received the vaccine.

hmmm wrote: »

Normality will return when we know hospitals won't be over-run. Even if we vaccinate all the vulnerable and healthcare workers, we are told it will take more than that. In particular, a vaccine is rarely 100% effective so large numbers of the vulnerable remain in danger.

I don't know why the message that you have to control Covid to have a better economy hasn't got through to some people yet. Even the Financial Times had a very good article (and graph) up saying the same thing last week. The countries that got control of Covid and had fewer deaths did far better than those who didn't. Saying things like "open up" and let the virus spread is not going to help the economy, the facts show that it will hurt it.

What will get us back to normality is a large take-up of the vaccine by everyone, vulnerable or not-vulnerable. We don't know yet what the % will need to be, but it sounds like it might be about 60-75% at a minimum.

Let the virus spread would scare the population ****less to go outside the door within a few weeks after we all go to the pub first.

There's been 10,000 ish confirmed cases in the +65 age group and 1,500 deaths approx. That's a rate of 15%.

Efficacy of the candidate vaccines in the elderly have not been fully established, but If a vaccine for that age group managed to reduce hospitalizations and deaths to 25% of what it was, i presume that would be a very optimistic outcome.
But taking that, the fatality rate becomes 3.75%, based on the premise that normality should return after they are vaccinated 650,000 + 65s exposed.... 3.75% of that is ... well a lot...

Even after the first stage of vaccines for healthcare and high risk there will be curve flattening to do, the health service will be able to tolerate hopefully a higher sustained incidence level of the virus but it still has to be sustained not on the increase. Infact the +65s after all that will still probably be told to take caution and restrict their movements.

There will be restrictions until there immunity in the population god knows, hopefully after dealing with a post xmas spike we wont have to deal will anything worse than localized level 3s.

iguana wrote: »

An enormous amount of people have autoimmune conditions. I get psoriasis on my scalp when I'm under extreme stress. I had tiny endometrial growths on my right ovary. Both are auto-immune conditions but I'd be very surprised if I get called up any earlier for a vaccine because of them.

Might depend what medication your on. I have psoriasis too but I’m on injections to suppress my immune system

What about this cure from Venezuela then? I'm assuming it's not true.

Redordeadqwwer wrote: »

What about this cure from Venezuela then? I'm assuming it's not true.

It seems they have a molecule and El Presidente wants the WHO to verify it. Very early days on hoax - no hoax!

drunkmonkey wrote: »

This is very strange, the flu has disappeared but we have covid instead and the Venezuelans are using an anti flu drug to combat covid and calling it a cure.
This is Avifavir i'm assuming.

Yeah Avifavir according to the article.

hmmm wrote: »

Normality will return when we know hospitals won't be over-run. Even if we vaccinate all the vulnerable and healthcare workers, we are told it will take more than that. In particular, a vaccine is rarely 100% effective so large numbers of the vulnerable remain in danger.

I don't know why the message that you have to control Covid to have a better economy hasn't got through to some people yet. Even the Financial Times had a very good article (and graph) up saying the same thing last week. The countries that got control of Covid and had fewer deaths did far better than those who didn't. Saying things like "open up" and let the virus spread is not going to help the economy, the facts show that it will hurt it.

What will get us back to normality is a large take-up of the vaccine by everyone, vulnerable or not-vulnerable. We don't know yet what the % will need to be, but it sounds like it might be about 60-75% at a minimum.

I agree. The end game is when the virus is sufficiently suppressed, so that the health service can function as normal whilst also having the capacity to deal with any covid patients. I think this is what the experts mean when they say "living with the virus". It's fairly obvious that the disease cannot be eradicated now, and a zero covid policy probably isn't a feasible option for us given the NI border.

However, the question remains - at what point do we settle for an adequate approach, rather than seeking a perfect solution? Some are still stating that we will be living with social distancing for a long time, even with a vaccine. That's fine, when looking at the problem from a purely medical perspective. However, social distancing is destroying economies (not to mention the wellbeing of the general public) and at what point do we (or more precisely, the government) decide to abandon it. For instance, if the vaccine has an efficacy of 75% and an uptake is 75%, then that is 56% protection - will that be considered enough? I guess we will have to wait and see how that translates to hospital admissions. Because, as cold and callous as it sounds, at some point the risk to the economy will exceed the risk to public health, and a decision will have to be made to move on. I can only see these voices growing louder as we move into 2021.

dominatinMC wrote: »

I agree. The end game is when the virus is sufficiently suppressed, so that the health service can function as normal whilst also having the capacity to deal with any covid patients. I think this is what the experts mean when they say "living with the virus". It's fairly obvious that the disease cannot be eradicated now, and a zero covid policy probably isn't a feasible option for us given the NI border.

However, the question remains - at what point do we settle for an adequate approach, rather than seeking a perfect solution? Some are still stating that we will be living with social distancing for a long time, even with a vaccine. That's fine, when looking at the problem from a purely medical perspective. However, social distancing is destroying economies (not to mention the wellbeing of the general public) and at what point do we (or more precisely, the government) decide to abandon it. For instance, if the vaccine has an efficacy of 75% and an uptake is 75%, then that is 56% protection - will that be considered enough? I guess we will have to wait and see how that translates to hospital admissions. Because, as cold and callous as it sounds, at some point the risk to the economy will exceed the risk to public health, and a decision will have to be made to move on. I can only see these voices growing louder as we move into 2021.

But a vaccine will do nothing to suppress it, it will only stop people becoming seriously ill. That’s why I see no way out of this

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/27/covid-vaccine-uk-oxford-university-astrazeneca-works-in-all-ages-trials-suggest

Irish Stones wrote: »

So they lied and knew they were lying.
And put people through unnecessary risks.


There was a lack of masks because the production plans of many countries focused on useless things, rather than what was needed.
For instance, Italy where I'm based. We'd rather produce food and fashion rather than masks and respirators. And it proved wrong.
And even when they/we realised it, it took months to convert or start new productions.
We're smart, aren't we?

To put it in simple terms for some people who don't understand.

I have 10 apples
I need masks
masks take a few months to create the supplychain of materials and get distributed
In the meantime, I sell the apples, and try and ensure the masks I have go where is needed to avoid a panic
When masks have been manufactured, I start selling them as well

Does it need to be dumbed down any more?

Micky 32 wrote: »

That would be brilliant if it does.

Of course it would but it won’t get the works back to normal

If what some of these experts are saying now is true that we may only get an efficacy of about 50% - 60%, then we are clearly going to have to come up with a different strategy to what we have now.

We could be looking at rolling lockdowns for several years if we are to go by what they are saying now.
If the issue is that we don't want to overwhelm the hospitals then we need to start putting massive funds and planning into a serious increase into ICU and hospital capacity now.

Its not good enough now to keep saying that we have to keep restrictions going until a vaccine is found when in reality a vaccine is not looking like it will be the solution we need to end the restrictions.

Anything to be read into this?
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-first-covid-vaccines-likely-to-be-imperfect-and-might-not-prevent-infection-says-taskforce-boss-12116593

Gael23 wrote: »

Of course it would but it won’t get the works back to normal

Less seriously ill = less in hospitals so restrictions will ease.

jackboy wrote: »

Total change in spin now as the vaccines are close to release. A few weeks ago the pharma companies and a lot of experts were bigging up the vaccines as a solution to the pandemic. Now that they are close to release everything has changed. The same people are now dampening down expectations and saying that vaccines will be just another tool against the virus and won’t end the current restrictions and social distancing.

It would be great if you could provide a single example.