Is the government stupid or are they being ingenious

[SirGalahad]

Also nobody from the AZ trial was hospitalised by covid,so it looks like it will reduce strain on hospitals.

What are you on about? The stopped the whole trials over an adverse effect.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/09/09/astrazeneca-covid19-vaccine-trial-hold-patient-report/

There was also a patient in Brazil.

 

[Charlie George]

What are you on about? The stopped the whole trials over an adverse effect.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/09/09/astrazeneca-covid19-vaccine-trial-hold-patient-report/

There was also a patient in Brazil.

Did you read what i said?

 

[SirGalahad]

Did you read what i said?

Yes. Your point doesn't make sense. If they had the vaccine it was either effective for a person or not. If it wasn't effective then they could get covid which would mean they are no more different than someone without the vaccine. The vaccines are not therapies - which is what you are alluding to.

 

[Charlie George]

Yes. Your point doesn't make sense. If they had the vaccine it was either effective for a person or not. If it wasn't effective then they could get covid which would mean they are no more different than someone without the vaccine. The vaccines are not therapies - which is what you are alluding to.

Your answer didn't make sense, my point was even those who got covid in the trial only had it mild so didn't die, better then someone without a vaccine who may well die or find themselves in hospital as some in the placebo group were.

 

[IT Minion]

Yes. Your point doesn't make sense. If they had the vaccine it was either effective for a person or not. If it wasn't effective then they could get covid which would mean they are no more different than someone without the vaccine. The vaccines are not therapies - which is what you are alluding to.

That's not correct. Vaccines often don't provide perfect immunity against diseases but reduce the effect to a negligible level. The smallpox Vaccine is a famous example. This is why the scientists are stressing that we don't know if the vaccines will prevent people getting minor infections and passing the virus on.

The protection level that's being referred to is a simple ' someone caught it and we detected it' level. If AZ were trying harder to detect infections then the protection levels aren't directly comparable.

Also over a huge scale deployment you should be able to tell if the infections are milder even for those vaccinated but not fully immune. We don't have any good data on that yet for any Covid-19 Vaccine.

Edit: is there a chance we're talking past each other but all agree here?

 

[SirGalahad]

Your answer didn't make sense, my point was even those who got covid in the trial only had it mild so didn't die, better then someone without a vaccine who may well die or find themselves in hospital as some in the placebo group were.

99% of people who get covid don't die. Those people who took the vaccine it either worked for them or not. If it didn't work for them then they were still up with a good chance of survival. The moment they reported symptoms and they were tested as positive - the vaccine was not effective for them thus affecting its efficacy.

Therapies are aimed at reducing your symptoms after you have been infected.

 

[JP_]

I've not yet the article or the comments, but i think the answer is, Stupid.

We now have what we need to stop this virus, but poor decision making will mean it will draft on.

 

[Charlie George]

That's not correct. Vaccines often don't provide perfect immunity against diseases but reduce the effect to a negligible level. The smallpox Vaccine is a famous example. This is why the scientists are stressing that we don't know if the vaccines will prevent people getting minor infections and passing the virus on.

The protection level that's being referred to is a simple ' someone caught it and we detected it' level. If AZ were trying harder to detect infections then the protection levels aren't directly comparable.

Also over a huge scale deployment you should be able to tell if the infections are milder even for those vaccinated but not fully immune. We don't have any good data on that yet for any Covid-19 Vaccine.

Edit: is there a chance we're talking past each other but all agree here?

Yes were arguing about something we may pretend to know,i wouldn't ask a virologist advice on building a wall

 

[SirGalahad]

That's not correct. Vaccines often don't provide perfect immunity against diseases but reduce the effect to a negligible level. The smallpox Vaccine is a famous example. This is why the scientists are stressing that we don't know if the vaccines will prevent people getting minor infections and passing the virus on.

The protection level that's being referred to is a simple ' someone caught it and we detected it' level. If AZ were trying harder to detect infections then the protection levels aren't directly comparable.

Also over a huge scale deployment you should be able to tell if the infections are milder even for those vaccinated but not fully immune. We don't have any good data on that yet for any Covid-19 Vaccine.

Edit: is there a chance we're talking past each other but all agree here?

I said effective, never mentioned perfect. What is the prime purpose of vaccines? You build up antibodies so when you actually get infected your symptoms will be less. It doesn's stop ongoing transmission - so far I have not seen if the vaccines have a sterilising effect.

The way they test for vaccine efficacy is wait for people to report and then work it out how effective it is. The moment someone tests positive means they had symptoms enough for them to report and test. That reduces the efficacy.

 

[IT Minion]

99% of people who get covid don't die. Those people who took the vaccine it either worked for them or not. If it didn't work for them then they were still up with a good chance of survival. The moment they reported symptoms and they were tested as positive - the vaccine was not effective for them thus affecting its efficacy.

Yeah, you're just flat wrong on that.

The purpose of vaccines is to stop diseases being dangerous. A vaccine that stops you being seriously ill is still effective.

 

[Charlie George]

99% of people who get covid don't die. Those people who took the vaccine it either worked for them or not. If it didn't work for them then they were still up with a good chance of survival. The moment they reported symptoms and they were tested as positive - the vaccine was not effective for them thus affecting its efficacy.

Therapies are aimed at reducing your symptoms after you have been infected.

But people in the placebo group did get hospitalised and die,not 1 in trial, i know which one i'd prefer,last word on subject goodnight.

 

[SirGalahad]

Yeah, you're just flat wrong on that.

The purpose of vaccines is to stop diseases being dangerous. A vaccine that stops you being seriously ill is still effective.

Perhaps if you read on.

What is the prime purpose of vaccines? You build up antibodies so when you actually get infected your symptoms will be less. It doesn's stop ongoing transmission - so far I have not seen if the vaccines have a sterilising effect.

 

[securespark]

As nobody can spell 'guinea pigs' shall we just refer to them by their Latin name, 'Cavia porcellus'.

Great belly laugh, thank you!

 

[charliegolf]

Can't be arsed to read all the posts, but has anyone noted that the mix n match proposal is er, not a proposal; and `the NYP has been asked to retract?

 

[dontbelieveawordofit]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9107457/Young-women-likely-refuse-Covid-jab-poll-shows.html