Irish Stones wrote: » I think it was August or early September when WHO said that coughing/sneezing in your elbow was to be avoided.
Ten of Swords wrote: » Can we get back to the topic of vaccines and testing procedures please
hmmm wrote: » Apologies if this has been posted already. This statement is kind of weird, I don't think anyone seriously believed there would be tens of millions of doses available in the UK before year end?https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-astrazenec/delivery-timetable-of-oxford-astrazeneca-vaccine-has-slipped-uk-official-says-idUSKBN27K2GQ "The timetable for delivery of the Oxford University/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine candidate has slipped, the UK’s vaccine chief said, adding Britain will receive just 4 million doses of the shot this year."
stephenjmcd wrote: » What exactly did they expect? It was flagged multiple times that it would be small deliveries this year if any. 4 million is still a pretty decent delivery for something with EUA for just one country
hmmm wrote: » You can get a good overview of which vaccines use full-length spike proteins here - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2798-3https://twitter.com/_b_meyer/status/1324419881530523649
Deleted User wrote: » Would you be worried about vaccine prospects should the mutated version end up in widespread circulation?
A nasal spray that blocks the absorption of the SARS-CoV-2 virus has completely protected ferrets it was tested on, according to a small study released on Thursday by an international team of scientists. The study, which was limited to animals and has not yet been peer-reviewed, was assessed by several health experts at the request of The New York Times.
tobefrank321 wrote: » Holohan said about 30% of population here is vulnerable. You'd have to assume its similar in the UK, meaning 20 million roughly. So while 4 million is a lot its a fraction of what is needed. They'll vaccinate the very highest risk first. Might make sense to vaccinate care home staff. Tough choices will be made on who gets it first due to limited supply. You'd wonder does it make sense to give it to someome near to death from something else over a younger person with years to live.
A recent study by Zoufaly et al. published in The Lancet Respiratory Medicine describes encouraging data from the first severe COVID-19 patient successfully treated with human recombinant soluble angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (hrsACE2).
is_that_so wrote: » Barely qualifies as a study - just one patient! A test of the use of human recombinant soluble ACE2 (hrsACE2)https://www.nature.com/articles/s41392-020-00374-6
polesheep wrote: » That's a fascinating question as it mirrors the situation in general.
Rapid tests are easy to use: they can be deployed in high-risk environments, such as care homes or educational institutions, and by personnel with little or no specialist training. Some will be suitable for home use as well, once given the go-ahead by regulators. Collectively, they promise to be a useful adjunct to lab-based PCR diagnostic testing and, if deployed effectively and at scale, could strengthen flagging containment efforts by quickly identifying new outbreaks before they spread.
is_that_so wrote: » The state of play on rapid tests!https://www.nature.com/articles/d41587-020-00021-z
Thats me wrote: » ~20% false negatives
NH2013 wrote: » Probably more useful was a screening tool for places such as at airports or large events, festivals, concerts etc. Testing perhaps a bit of a generous term for something with a ~20% negative rate but no reason it couldn’t be used as a screening tool to try catch cases in the community at events and for travel.
BeefeaterHat wrote: » Has the fiasco with the mink farms in Denmark potentially ****ed over the vaccines or are the press doing what they do best and whipping up a frenzy?
Hardyn wrote: » https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.06.371617v1 A new study on immunity. The participants were people from Lombardy and Sweden. Their initial symptoms ranged from mild to critical. A vast majority of them showed T-cell and B-cell responses 6-8 months after infection regardless of the initial severity.
Hmmzis wrote: » Intersting study on T cells and a stab at trying toget to a correlate of disease protection based on T cells.https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.02.20222778v1 They observed no symptomatic disease in the high T cell count group while there were 20 symptomatic infections in the low T cell cohort. The numbers in both groups would indicate statistical significance.
Thierry12 wrote: » Question Why can't they release an antibody test that targets T Cell? We've being listening to this T Cell thing for months now Are we getting anywhere? We have one for TBhttps://www.ouh.nhs.uk/immunology/diagnostic-tests/tests-catalogue/t-spot-tb.aspx We sent a man to the moon 50 years ago and supposedly have cars that can drive themselves up the Conor Pass but can't test people for Covid immunity This whole Covid thing has proven what I always thought We are full of **** about our technological capabilities