funnydoggy wrote: » Ronan Glynn sh*tting on the vaccine. Edit: he changes his course halfway through talking. He's optimistic. TBH I think he's better than Tony.
Hardyn wrote: » To be fair I think he was just trying to temper expectations but realised he was coming across negatively. Hence the change in tone.
Fr_Dougal wrote: » It’s time to close the Irish mink farms.
El Sueño wrote: » Is there something new on the mink thing? I've heard nothing about it for over a week at this stage
Marhay70 wrote: » Luke O'Neill last week was saying that because the Pfizer and now, by extension, the Moderna, were MRNA vaccines, it might be possible to adjust the chemical make up to cope with mutations.
ixoy wrote: » RTE have a new headline for us! BBC is positive: Covid vaccine shows nearly 95% protection RTE: Warning over 'vaccine hesitancy' amid 'promising' Moderna results Warning is the first key word. Double down with 'hesitancy' to give you pause. And slam it home by wrapping "promising" in quotes to make you question. What a dark headline, when it could be spun much more positively.
theoneeyedman wrote: » I have a question. What are they claiming when they say 95% effective, does that mean for every 100 people exposed to the virus, that 95 are effectively protected, but that 5 will catch the virus/develop the illness??
Timistry wrote: » There will definetely be restrictions next summer. There are huge logisitical and storage challenges with administering the Pfizer vaccine. Say if 50% of the population is vacinatied by next summer (very very ambitious) then the other 50% are still as vunerable as they are today. The only way to protect them is to socially distance, limit numbers of people congregating ect. I want this to be over too but the reality is we are probably about half way towards having our old way of life back.
St.Spodo wrote: » The most vulnerable 50% of the population make up about 98% of the people who end up in hospital with covid. If they are not getting sick, I can see a situation where most social activity can once again take place by mid 2021, with the exception of large gatherings.
Away With The Fairies wrote: » When they say, the vaccine is 90-95% effective, what does that mean? Will it give sterilising immunity?
hmmm wrote: » That data isn't available yet, the 94% is protection against the disease and not infection. I saw an interview earlier with Moncef Slaoui who is the head of operation warp speed in the US. If I heard him right, his view was: - If they're seeing 94% protection against the disease, it's likely it may provide or come close to providing sterilising immunity. Gottlieb said something similar, that it should reduce the infectious period significantly at a minimum. - The antibody response will fade over time, so this will probably not provide long-term protection against infection - However, it will probably provide long-term protection against disease.
Irish Stones wrote: » In my opinion, it's weird that no more certainties can be given about this vaccine. Lots of probably, likely, and so on. Wouldn't these terms instill too many doubts in people who are already unsure about taking this vaccine? I think that nobody could blame them if they are hesitant.
Irish Stones wrote: » It seems that there's no deal between EU and Moderna, so each State should seek an own agrement with them The good news is that Moderna vaccine is not only protective but give sterilising immunity as well.
Irish Stones wrote: » It seems that there's no deal between EU and Moderna, so each State should seek an own agrement with them
Le Bruise wrote: » Where are you seeing this?? EU are currently in the process of securing a deal with Moderna.
stephenjmcd wrote: » Ehh that was announced yesterday, 160m doses. EU states are collectively part of the EU vaccine purchase fund so they can't go doing their own deals. And again there is no data available on sterilising immunity with Moderna so not sure where your getting that certainty from.
Irish Stones wrote: » See my post above. The source is always that fake newspapers that publishes absolute rubbish, but so far it's always proven right for what concerns us.
stephenjmcd wrote: » You can throw out that line as much as you want to try and be smart but ultimately the source is wrong on this yet again.
Irish Stones wrote: » I told you, that's a fake newpapers. Who knows there is behind that website.