• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Coronavirus (Non-Politics)

rigsby

Life President
Joined
Oct 12, 2014
Messages
12,854
Rather than say 'look up something' why don't you explain what your view is and what the evidence is that's informed your view? You've already posted about this before? If you think that we're walking into another situation where an unsafe vaccine is launched, then please let us know why you think that's the case?

I found this a helpful summary of how lessons have been learned:
I'm sure with your knowledge you will warn us all that after the 1976 disaster you can no longer claim against a vaccine company, if they get it wrong.
 

GNH

Fish House Ultras
Joined
Oct 26, 2003
Messages
2,635
Location
Rayleigh
Look up the US mass vaccination programme of 1976. They stopped it after 25% of the population had been done and have covered up the side effects since.
That's why i asked the question.

If the staff that are supposed to administer the vaccine won't take it then good luck trying to convince others to do the same.

There's no way of knowing it's safe long term yet but there's also no way of knowing it's not and the only way to find out is an educated gamble at best. What alternatives are there though?
 

Pubey

Frequent flyer in all buzzing chatrooms
Joined
Jan 3, 2018
Messages
31,476
That's why i asked the question.

If the staff that are supposed to administer the vaccine won't take it then good luck trying to convince others to do the same.

There's no way of knowing it's safe long term yet but there's also no way of knowing it's not and the only way to find out is an educated gamble at best. What alternatives are there though?
Vaccines are much safer now than they were in the 70s. They are one of the most studied and scrutinised areas of medicine/immunology/pharmacology. Most vaccine research builds upon what is known and what has been done previously, so refining good vaccines and learning from lessons where it's gone wrong. The way I think of it is that if you're on death's door then you'll take a toxic medicine if it has a chance of helping/curing you. You'll be less concerned about the side effects and more keen to take the medicine given the potential upside.

The flip side is true for a vaccine, if you give something to an otherwise healthy person you have to have confidence that it's not going to make them unwell, this is how the benefit/risk profile is established.

Safety will be fairly short-term data but given the size of the study it'd be expected to spot signals of serious adverse events. We shouldn't expect people to be dropping dead after this vaccine seeing as that hasn't happened after being administered to tens of thousands of people in closely monitored studies, but nothing is a guarantee.

For BNT192 it's interesting because it is a novel method of designing/developing a vaccine and therefore there is less known based on previous experience regarding its safety profile. Regulators will be on top of this.
 
Last edited:

rigsby

Life President
Joined
Oct 12, 2014
Messages
12,854
That's why i asked the question.

If the staff that are supposed to administer the vaccine won't take it then good luck trying to convince others to do the same.

There's no way of knowing it's safe long term yet but there's also no way of knowing it's not and the only way to find out is an educated gamble at best. What alternatives are there though?
The alternative is not to have a vaccine. Those that want it can have it. Those that don't need it, like children or anyone under 50, shouldn't have it.
 

Pubey

Frequent flyer in all buzzing chatrooms
Joined
Jan 3, 2018
Messages
31,476
The alternative is not to have a vaccine. Those that want it can have it. Those that don't need it, like children or anyone under 50, shouldn't have it.
The long term sequelae of COVID-19 is a real concern. People are still suffering months after infection, including a pretty significant proportion of fit/healthy individuals. This virus is no joke, and I personally know people who are still very wiped out several weeks later. As time moves on we'll know more and more about the long-term effects of this virus. I wouldn't be gambling on this versus taking a vaccine with good safety data, and I work a fairly sedentary job on a secure contract and with private health insurance. Lots of people are on zero-hours contracts or are self-employed... not sure I wouldn't chance it if in that situation.

This was in the news a few days ago:

Also this is ignoring the societal good of having a vaccination to avoid onwards transmission, in particular to those who are unable to be vaccinated, e.g. immunocompromised people.
 
Last edited:

rigsby

Life President
Joined
Oct 12, 2014
Messages
12,854
There is an old saying in the uniformed/military world...."Don't be first, don't be last"

I'll stick to that thanks.
 

Leigh_Seasider

Sunning it on the Essex Riviera
Joined
Aug 31, 2019
Messages
1,946
Location
Leigh-on-Sea
Well, they just had Prof Sir John Bell on breakfast tv and he seems pretty confident we’ll be back to normal by spring. This fits with when furlough is due to end, so is this really what we’ve all been waiting for? Understand politicians and the likes of Van-Tam being cautious but this bloke was pretty emphatic.
 

Rootshallbloke

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
20,129
Location
Westcliff riviera
Well, they just had Prof Sir John Bell on breakfast tv and he seems pretty confident we’ll be back to normal by spring. This fits with when furlough is due to end, so is this really what we’ve all been waiting for? Understand politicians and the likes of Van-Tam being cautious but this bloke was pretty emphatic.
All well and good, but until formal approval is granted to the Pfizer vaccine, and then we see how the first wave reacts to it, we are a long way off being ready for normal by the Spring. No doubt there will be the world's supply of experts rolled out on TV over the next few weeks but it is Sage that the Government listen to.
 

THE SEVENTIES NORTH BANK

Life President
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
11,447
Location
SHOEBURY
So according to the echo, car insurers may not pay out if you have an accident if you are doing non essential travel during lockdown. I don't agree with this, as they've already had a result as less traffic in general, and less accidents during any lockdown. It seems like they are taking advantage.
 
Last edited:

Spaceman Spiff

Attila the Admin
Staff member
Joined
Oct 26, 2003
Messages
10,177
Location
Kennington, London
Well, they just had Prof Sir John Bell on breakfast tv and he seems pretty confident we’ll be back to normal by spring. This fits with when furlough is due to end, so is this really what we’ve all been waiting for? Understand politicians and the likes of Van-Tam being cautious but this bloke was pretty emphatic.
Yes, basically - and this has always been the timeline. However you have to be really careful with messaging because people will react now to news about something coming in a few months’ time. We don’t want (and can’t afford, financially, medically or ethically) to see a big rise in infections and deaths before the vaccine gets out to the wider population because people go gung ho. You also can’t announce a vaccine will definitely be available until it’s finally announced as safe and effective (like one was yesterday, subject to peer review) even though it’s clear that there are several candidates that have met expectations throughout the process and continue to do so.

Government is working to an assumption of normality by Easter, give or take. Lots of risk and uncertainty in that though - and indeed a possibility of substantial normality earlier than that.
 

rigsby

Life President
Joined
Oct 12, 2014
Messages
12,854
Yes, basically - and this has always been the timeline. However you have to be really careful with messaging because people will react now to news about something coming in a few months’ time. We don’t want (and can’t afford, financially, medically or ethically) to see a big rise in infections and deaths before the vaccine gets out to the wider population because people go gung ho. You also can’t announce a vaccine will definitely be available until it’s finally announced as safe and effective (like one was yesterday, subject to peer review) even though it’s clear that there are several candidates that have met expectations throughout the process and continue to do so.

Government is working to an assumption of normality by Easter, give or take. Lots of risk and uncertainty in that though - and indeed a possibility of substantial normality earlier than that.
Sounds like you have a dose of China virus
 

Spaceman Spiff

Attila the Admin
Staff member
Joined
Oct 26, 2003
Messages
10,177
Location
Kennington, London
This is something that remains to be seen @OldBlueLady. I don’t think a single jab will offer lifeline protection against this or any coronavirus, because of the mutations. There may be several mutations already out there (there is some evidence to suggest this, but more work is needed to be sure).

I’d think the likeliest outcome is that COVID-19 treatment in the medium term aligns with our current experience of flu - needing a jab each year (possibly two) to protect against those strains in circulation that year that are most likely to be caught, but with a much smaller number of people still unfortunately catching it and dying from it in any given year. We’ll see, but that would be an excellent result that will save many millions of lives and allow society to function unhindered.
 

THE SEVENTIES NORTH BANK

Life President
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
11,447
Location
SHOEBURY
I'm happy for all the guys in the long queue today at The Game Store. Yes that shop selling essential stuff, was open so people could pick up the Xbox Series X and Series S launched across the UK today. They had four police and community officers to watch over the queue.
There's something not quite right about this. I can't put my finger on it, even if it was click and collect.

 

Mad Cyril

Official sponsor of Mark Moseley's white trainers.
Joined
Oct 29, 2003
Messages
16,906
Location
Flavour country
I'm happy for all the guys in the long queue today at The Game Store. Yes that shop selling essential stuff, was open so people could pick up the Xbox Series X and Series S launched across the UK today. They had four police and community officers to watch over the queue.
There's something not quite right about this. I can't put my finger on it, even if it was click and collect.

You get a better class of person at Game.

CEX on the other hand...
 

Pubey

Frequent flyer in all buzzing chatrooms
Joined
Jan 3, 2018
Messages
31,476
I must admit that I'm very sceptical of a vaccine for a virus that seems to be mutating all the time and we've had many different strains of over the years. Vaccines for disease, yes, absolutely, but a virus? :Thumbs down:
Most of our vaccines are for a virus. I'm not sure why you're skeptical about this?

Flu/Influenza is caused by a virus. It mutates seasonally which is why we get a seasonal flu jab. The jab is usually pretty effective.

Chicken pox (varicella) is caused by a virus. It can be vaccinated against.
Measles, mumps and rubella are all caused by a virus. The vaccines are highly effective
Polio is caused by a virus. As you know, the effective vaccination programme has almost eradicated polio completely. One of the greatest public health achievements of the 20th century

There are vaccines for hepatitis A and B, which are often caused by viral infections.

There are vaccines for rotavirus, pertussis (whooping cough), HPV, shingles etc. All caused by a virus.

Many of these are sometimes fatal conditions, highly contagious, and were massively public health issues before the vaccines were developed. Now we rarely see polio or measles or pertussis, compared to 70 years ago when they were killing thousands of people each year.
 
Top