SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)

[rcoobc]

UK has two million vaccinated so far with 13 million planned by mid Feb. AstraZeneca have said they will supply 2 million a week soon.

Should make a real dent in the death toll but it's a tragedy many will die becasue we couldn't hold out over chrimbo. People may have lived to see many more will have seen their last.

Many will die because the R number has been> 1.0 since June. What's Christmas for to do with it. Christmas is a scapegoat for the government

 

[rcoobc]

Just saw reports where some people reacted badly days after taking the shot. Are they false reports?

A lot of people are reacting badly to it. Apparently the NHS is struggling with doctors and nurses out of action after taking it.. it's thought that if you've had COVID already You'll get a worse reaction ( according to my doctor friend)

Don't think anyone has died from it. It's safe for nearly everyone

 

[One Night Only]

Just saw reports where some people reacted badly days after taking the shot. Are they false reports?

Don't think those reports are false, sure I seen them after the first round where people who had the jab shouldn't have had it. There are always certain people who will react badly to some vaccines depending on what's in them. Can't remember what the patient's actually had now which caused them to react. It was a small number and I think it was well reported around doctors/hospitals that certain types of patients should not be given certain vaccines? Not 100% sure if that's all correct but just trying to remember now.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

A lot of people are reacting badly to it. Apparently the NHS is struggling with doctors and nurses out of action after taking it.. it's thought that if you've had COVID already You'll get a worse reaction ( according to my doctor friend)

Don't think anyone has died from it. It's safe for nearly everyone

You’re going to have to attach numbers and proof to claims like this. Especially for the bold.

Everyone should have to. Without statistics and evidence your comments will be parroted everywhere and idiots will quote them as fact

2 Million vaccines. There will be some allergic reactions.

Be more responsible.

Edit : Quickly sourced link.Here

 

[Pogue Mahone]

You’re going to have to attach numbers and proof to claims like this. Especially for the bold.

Everyone should have to. Without statistics and evidence your comments will be parroted everywhere and idiots will quote them as fact

2 Million vaccines. There will be some allergic reactions.

Be more responsible.

Based on the clinical trials you can expect a substantial number of people to have fairly significant side effects. Especially after the second dose (or if you’ve already had covid). Fever, fatigue, headache etc. Basically like a mild flu. Can last a day or two and might make you too sick to work.

To be honest, that’s the sort of information which should be shared. So you don’t get idiots pretending there’s a conspiracy to hide this from them. Everyone who actually gets the vaccine will have this all explained before their first jab.

 

[rcoobc]

You’re going to have to attach numbers and proof to claims like this. Especially for the bold.

Everyone should have to. Without statistics and evidence your comments will be parroted everywhere and idiots will quote them as fact

2 Million vaccines. There will be some allergic reactions.

Be more responsible.

I cannot do that because no figures exist. As I said, this is all I have been told from my doctor friend. It's second hand evidence. Take it with a pinch of salt, etc. But, paraphrasing what my mate said:

The NHS are struggling. They are at a critical mass of COVID patients and cannot broadly take an increase from that.

At the same time, the NHS staff are being vaccinated but now some are off because of the vaccination or at least are unwell. The vaccine seems to have a stronger reaction if you've already had the virus before, which of course huge numbers of NHS staff have. (He didn't say which vaccine he was talking about)

Sorry I can't give you more than my doctor mate told me.

But we have a NHS doctor who posts on here who said he "had COVID twice and the vaccine had hit him harder than COVID"

 

[rcoobc]

Had my vaccine on Thursday. I always react badly to vaccines, but it felt as if the peak of my COVID hit me in one evening. I felt terrible. I’m back to normal now though. I’ve had COVID twice already and I’d say my reaction was the worst I’ve felt.

Nevertheless, take the vaccine when it’s offered to you.

My thoughts over the last few weeks [more in quote]

..

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Based on the clinical trials you can expect a substantial number of people to have fairly significant side effects. Especially after the second dose (or if you’ve already had covid). Fever, fatigue, headache etc. Basically like a mild flu. Can last a day or two and might make you too sick to work.

To be honest, that’s the sort of information which should be shared. So you don’t get idiots pretending there’s a conspiracy to hide this from them. Everyone who actually gets the vaccine will have this all explained before their first jab.

Aye. I’m not suggesting that facts should not be shared. Or that there won’t be some experiencing some side effects

But trotting out “The NHS is struggling with it taking out doctors and nurses” is almost certainly alarmist bollocks.

If it’s not, at the very least, anyone posting should have to provide a source.

We all need to be better. Especially when it’s easy to be better.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

I cannot do that because no figures exist. As I said, this is all I have been told from my doctor friend. It's second hand evidence. Take it with a pinch of salt, etc. But, paraphrasing what my mate said:

The NHS are struggling. They are at a critical mass of COVID patients and cannot broadly take an increase from that.

At the same time, the NHS staff are being vaccinated but now some are off because of the vaccination or at least are unwell. The vaccine seems to have a stronger reaction if you've already had the virus before, which of course huge numbers of NHS staff have. (He didn't say which vaccine he was talking about)

Sorry I can't give you more than my doctor mate told me.

But we have a NHS doctor who posts on here who said he "had COVID twice and the vaccine had hit him harder than COVID"

This forum will turn into a Covidiot YouTube video comment section if all the evidence you need to post “The vaccine is taking out nurses and doctors” is ‘My mate and a poster here’. You haven’t qualified anything. Type of vaccine. Age. No proof of any kind.

Others may enjoy wild speculation. I guess I can just put a shit load of people on ignore but that feels daft.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

..

“I ALWAYS REACT BAD TO VACCINES” = Is your evidence? Jesus wept.

Quit. It’s irresponsible mate.

 

[rcoobc]

This forum will turn into a Covidiot YouTube video comment section if all the evidence you need to post “The vaccine is taking out nurses and doctors” is ‘My mate and a poster here’. You haven’t qualified anything. Type of vaccine. Age. No proof of any kind.

Others may enjoy wild speculation. I guess I can just put a shit load of people on ignore but that feels daft.

“I ALWAYS REACT BAD TO VACCINES” = Is your evidence? Jesus wept.

Quit. It’s irresponsible mate.

I understand your reaction . When BFA Hernandez posted that I initially thought he must be a hypochondriac.

It's a gutteral reaction, if someone goes against the prevailing wind of public opinion, they must be conspiracists or idiots.

Ive said it's second hand evidence, worse than circumstantial. I provided my source (my friend who is an NHS doctor).

For what it's worth the 3 people I know of who have had the vaccine so far didn't have major issues. One said she feels like her body was doing "something", and felt hot.

I'm not going to apologise for passing on information from my NHS doctor mate. If it was "my mate down the pub" sure.

In fact I've just written all that and I think that there is already studies showing people having worse reactions of they've had the viruses (of other vaccines). Let me see

 

[redshaw]

Many will die because the R number has been> 1.0 since June. What's Christmas for to do with it. Christmas is a scapegoat for the government

Erm, I've already highlighted that.

In case you didn't know there's a new strain as well. A hard lockdown should've happend early to mid December soon as it was clear and to not let things go until on early Jan. The earlier you lockdown properly the better and quicker the cases come down, those weeks have seen the virus grow out of control. Feel free if you disagree and don't want to take that onboard. I'm talking about many more extra deaths being added so close to getting vaccinated.

 

[golden_blunder]

It’s irresponsible to spread rumours about people reacting badly to the vaccines. We need as many people as possible to buy in fully and take them or we will continue in this feckin circle for years!

my father in law got his. First shot, no reaction. 2nd shot he felt fluey for a couple of days. That’s a small price to pay.

a small % may react badly but compared to the high percentage who have no side effects that’s the price to pay. Otherwise do we take no vaccines and let this thing continue to kill by the thousands and continue to mutate? Come on; grow up! Do the right thing; take the feckin shot and we can argue semantics afterwards

 

[rcoobc]

This isn't what you want @UnrelatedPsuedo

But it will have to do for now

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/370/6520/1022

Most people will escape “severe” side effects, defined as those that prevent daily activity. Fewer than 2% of recipients of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines developed severe fevers of 39°C to 40°C. ...


Other transient side effects would likely affect even more people. The independent board that conducted the interim analysis of Moderna's huge trial found that severe side effects included fatigue in 9.7% of participants, muscle pain in 8.9%, joint pain in 5.2%, and headache in 4.5%. In the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine trial, the numbers were lower: Severe side effects included fatigue (3.8%) and headache (2%).

But that's a higher rate of severe reactions than people may be accustomed to. “This is higher reactogenicity than is ordinarily seen with most flu vaccines, even the high-dose ones,” says Arnold Monto, an epidemiologist at the University of Michigan School of Public Health.

Bear in mind side affects can be due to a strong immune response. NHS staff will likely already have had the virus...

But let's pretend I'm anti-vax

 

[tombombadil]

So...

I ask the caf.

I it not time the UK Government update their symptoms list

Should not anyone who has a cough/cold/snotty nose/gastric issue have to stay home and book a test now?

It seems ridiculous that they are only looking for a "new continuous cough," a "loss of taste and smell," or a high temperature.

Someone at work had a "head cold" and tested positive on an asymptomatic test

Actually, in some countries, they have made it mandatory for anyone who reports to a clinic with any of the symptoms of a respiratory infection to immediately either
a) Self isolate and take a test. You can step out after a negative test
b) Self isolate for at least x number of days and skip the test

As you can imagine, this has a huge burden on the testing capacity as it will inundate it with a lot of negative results. So, the answer is, it depends on the situation. How many cases vs how much capacity you have left. Forcing a mandatory stay at home order may be easier on the system for anyone who presents symptoms to a doctor may be more practical when the system is overwhelmed.

Just saw reports where some people reacted badly days after taking the shot. Are they false reports?

This is rather sensitive. There are a few things to consider.
1) From a rough google search, there is literally hardly any news about people reacting badly. It's all mostly repeating the same few cases in early to mid Dec. Considering millions more people have been vaccinated now than during Dec, if it were really a problem, we would be seeing repeated reports up until now.

2) It is very common when taking a vaccine, for people to have immune responses. For example, a fever. Feeling unwell. Feeling the chills. Etc. That is your immune system building antibodies. Some frontliners may just be experiencing a stronger response and needed to take a day off. There is nothing dangerous about that and they represent only a small percentage of cases. This must be emphasised.

3) Known potential problems, like history of allergic reaction, have already been documented and are being communicated and checked up front before anyone takes a vaccine.

4) While it is important to ensure we address everything transparently, considering the sensitive times we are living in, we must also not allow hearsay to become fact. Everything should be fact checked. If you cannot find anything, in all likelihood, there is nothing.

 

[finneh]

No.

The underlined is happening.
The bold is not.

The vast overwhelming majority want clear and sensible restrictions that tighten and loosen as necessary, with all following them.

The two extremes you speak of are not even vaguely equal. The underlined has become a threat to public health. The bold has received zero traction or support from any meaningful number of people. Nobody wants it.

If you believe what you wrote, change your news sources immediately because you’re wrong. No if’s, buts or coconuts.

Do you believe that achieving "Covid Zero" as many groups advocated despite widespread community transmission could be achieved in a more libertarian manner? If so I'd file that under disingenuous.

In this thread alone there's been numerous posts praising China's reaction and lamenting the fact that we didn't adopt a far more authoritarian approach.

 

[rcoobc]

Here you go @UnrelatedPsuedo . Not from a scientific paper, but hope it will do

For a fraction of people, getting these first COVID-19 vaccines could be unpleasant—more than the usual unpleasantness of getting a shot. They might make you feel sick for a day or two, even though they contain no whole viruses to actually infect you. Both the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines are quite “reactogenic”—meaning they stimulate a strong immune response that can cause temporary but uncomfortable sore arms, fevers, chills, and headaches. In other words, getting them might suck a little, but it’s nowhere near as bad as COVID-19 itself.

Reactogenicity happens to some degree with all vaccines and is not in itself a safety concern. Vaccines, after all, work by tricking the body into thinking it has been infected, and these “symptoms” are an indication it has successfully done so. The fever, fatigue, and other signs we associate with colds or flu or even COVID-19 are typically caused by our immune responses, not the virus itself. “A reactogenic vaccine is not the same thing as an unsafe vaccine,” says Saad Omer, a vaccinologist and the director of the Yale Institute for Global Health.

Compared with existing vaccines, the two COVID-19 ones from Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna are a little more reactogenic than flu vaccines but are roughly on par with the shingles vaccine, which can interfere with daily life for a couple of days in some people. (Moderna’s also seems to be a little more reactogenic than Pfizer’s, possibly because it’s a larger dose.) These vaccines have enough of a kick that the CDC suggested hospitals stagger vaccinations among staff, so an entire unit isn’t out on a given day. Nursing homes as well are concerned about vaccinating all staff and residents at once, which could reduce staff availability at the same time residents need more care.

As the United States embarks on its largest, most complex vaccination campaign in history, experts say vaccine providers need to set expectations for people getting the shots. If someone who gets a vaccine is unpleasantly surprised, they might not come back for a second dose or their experience might sway their friends and family against it. Managing expectations is about making sure that Americans are willing to get the vaccine. “There has to be pretty good transparency about what you’re going to experience,” says Deborah Fuller, a microbiologist and vaccine researcher at the University of Washington.

The sore arms, fevers, and headaches are a result of innate immunity, the first of the immune system’s two main branches. Innate immunity is a blunt tool; it wants to fight anything foreign. When you get a COVID-19 vaccine, the cells in your arm take up mRNA that encodes a version of the coronavirus’s spike protein. The virus uses spike protein as a key to get into our cells, but unattached from the rest of the virus, the spike protein can’t infect anything. Still, the innate immune system recognizes the vaccine materials and the resulting spike protein as foreign.

This signal sets off a reaction that can feel a lot like getting sick. More immune cells get recruited to your arm, which may become inflamed and sore, activating even more immune cells that might cause whole-body symptoms such as fever and fatigue.
Some of those immune cells will belong to the second branch of the immune system, adaptive immunity. These are the targeted assassins of the immune system. They include B cells, which make antibodies that can bind to the spike protein and T cells that can recognize infected cells. Adaptive immunity is what will specifically protect you from COVID-19. And to get there, you first need the innate immune system to recognize the foreign protein and turn on the adaptive immune system. A reactogenic vaccine isn’t necessarily a more effective vaccine, but it is a sign that the first step is working.
Reactogenicity is also distinct from anaphylaxis, a severe allergic reaction that has occurred in a handful of people getting the Pfizer vaccine in the U.S. and the U.K. Anaphylaxis is an immune reaction as well, but it begins within minutes after exposure, with dramatic drops in blood pressure and difficulty breathing. It’s still unclear what in the shots triggered an allergic reaction, though the vaccines contain sugar as a cryoprotectant and salts to get the right acidity, in addition to the active ingredients. The CDC recommends 30 minutes of observation after COVID-19 vaccination for anyone with a history of anaphylaxis and 15 minutes for everyone else. Anaphylaxis is very treatable with epinephrine (a.k.a. an EpiPen) and antihistamines, and the vaccine recipients who experienced it have all recovered. The CDC and FDA have a vaccine adverse-events monitoring network that will scrutinize anaphylaxis as well other possible serious and longer-term side effects. These side effects are all different from normal and common reactogenicity, which should last only a couple of days.

The reactogenicity of the mRNA vaccines from Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna is likely largely due to the bubble of fat used to package the mRNA. These bubbles, called lipid nanoparticles, seem to stimulate the immune system in animals even when empty. In the past, vaccine makers sometimes have added a second ingredient to a vaccine, called an adjuvant, to enhance the immune response. The lipid nanoparticle, originally designed to protect the mRNA and smuggle it inside cells, just happened to act as an adjuvant as well. “It’s like a three-in-one package,” Fuller says.
Lipid nanoparticles are an active area of innovation for designing future mRNA vaccines, of which Pfizer/BioNTech’s and Moderna’s are the first two. The COVID-19 pandemic finally validated the years of expectations about the technology. When I spoke with Drew Weissman, a mRNA vaccine pioneer at the University of Pennsylvania, not long after the first clinical trial results that proved how well these vaccines worked, he was optimistic about the future of mRNA vaccines. The technology could be applied to improve existing vaccines, such as for the flu, and make new ones against other diseases or even cancer. His one note of caution was on reactogenicity. “We’re working on ways of reducing that,” he told me. “I’m not sure people will tolerate it for influenza vaccines or other vaccines.” For context, less than half of adults in the U.S. got the flu vaccine last year.

But COVID-19 on the whole is much worse than the flu. It’s already killed more than 300,000 Americans this year, compared with the 60,000 who die from the flu in a very bad year. And even for people who recover, illness from the coronavirus can last much longer and feel much worse. A sore arm or fever for a day, in contrast, might not be so bad.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/12/what-expect-when-you-get-covid-19-vaccine/617428/

Last I will say on the subject.

 

[rcoobc]

Actually, in some countries, they have made it mandatory for anyone who reports to a clinic with any of the symptoms of a respiratory infection to immediately either
a) Self isolate and take a test. You can step out after a negative test
b) Self isolate for at least x number of days and skip the test

As you can imagine, this has a huge burden on the testing capacity as it will inundate it with a lot of negative results. So, the answer is, it depends on the situation. How many cases vs how much capacity you have left. Forcing a mandatory stay at home order may be easier on the system for anyone who presents symptoms to a doctor may be more practical when the system is overwhelmed.

Bear in mind we've got to the point (here in the UK) where we have literally shut down nearly everything we can because "the NHS could become overwhelmed"

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...l-to-be-raised-to-5-highest-possible-12179280

I think that asking everyone with any and all possible symptoms cold/flu/respiratory/guttural/etc to stay at home might be better than shutting down the country?

Just a thought.

 

[Brwned]

I understand your reaction . When BFA Hernandez posted that I initially thought he must be a hypochondriac.

It's a gutteral reaction, if someone goes against the prevailing wind of public opinion, they must be conspiracists or idiots.

Ive said it's second hand evidence, worse than circumstantial. I provided my source (my friend who is an NHS doctor).

For what it's worth the 3 people I know of who have had the vaccine so far didn't have major issues. One said she feels like her body was doing "something", and felt hot.

I'm not going to apologise for passing on information from my NHS doctor mate. If it was "my mate down the pub" sure.

In fact I've just written all that and I think that there is already studies showing people having worse reactions of they've had the viruses (of other vaccines). Let me see

You aren’t going against the prevailing wind. The trials showed both Moderna and Pfizer produced significant side effects that would make it hard to work for many people, and too hard to work in a physically and mentally exhausting job for some. That doesn’t include allergic reactions. All for a short period of time. Oxford’s vaccine creates a weaker immune response but brings similar side effects. It was slightly worse in younger people and slightly better in older people I think. Might be the case for all of them actually.

 

[rcoobc]

You aren’t going against the prevailing wind. The trials showed both Moderna and Pfizer produced significant side effects that would make it hard to work for many people, and too hard to work in a physically and mentally exhausting job for some. That doesn’t include allergic reactions. All for a short period of time. Oxford’s vaccine creates a weaker immune response but brings similar side effects. It was slightly worse in younger people and slightly better in older people I think.

Thank you @Brwned

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

But let's pretend I'm anti-vax

Stop being such a queen. I didn’t accuse you of being Anti-Vax. I accused you of being irresponsible.

It would have been so much more sensible to just temper your future statements. Instead, you double down and hunt out some links that don’t come anywhere close to back up your claim that Hospitals are losing an impactful number of nurses and doctors due to vaccine side effects.

Grow up. It’s only the internet but you can be better. I’ll pop you on ignore anyway.

 

[tombombadil]

Bear in mind we've got to the point (here in the UK) where we have literally shut down nearly everything we can because "the NHS could become overwhelmed"

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...l-to-be-raised-to-5-highest-possible-12179280

I think that asking everyone with any and all possible symptoms cold/flu/respiratory/guttural/etc to stay at home might be better than shutting down the country?

Just a thought.

Considering UK is entering lockdown, every one is already automatically self isolating. Which basically renders any more additional testing moot. The key purpose of the lockdown is to auto isolate everyone until the hidden infections clear off and therefore breaking the chain of infections, after all. But if the lockdown is too lax, you may be right that more testing may be necessary. But that is again, moot, because do you even have the capacity to test and contact trace even more?

 

[Schmeichel's Cartwheel]

BBC telling people to wear masks during sex with your partner. They are openly trolling at this point

 

[tombombadil]

BBC telling people to wear masks during sex with your partner. They are openly trolling at this point

Are you fecking kidding?

Do you have any links?

Edit: Nvm found it ...

That's why the Terrence Higgins Trust recommends not kissing, wearing a face mask during sex and favouring positions where you're not face-to-face.
It adds the virus has been found in semen and poo, which is why you should use condoms and dams for oral sex to minimise risk.
And given we're supposed to be doing it after most things - washing your hands for more than 20 seconds or using hand sanitiser before and after sex is recommended

https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-53736087

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Do you believe that achieving "Covid Zero" as many groups advocated despite widespread community transmission could be achieved in a more libertarian manner? If so I'd file that under disingenuous.

In this thread alone there's been numerous posts praising China's reaction and lamenting the fact that we didn't adopt a far more authoritarian approach.

Stop applying political labels. You’re so goddamn dramatic when you’re on the hook.

If you think there’s a large number of people in this country that are advocating Chinese lockdown methods then you’re consuming the wrong media. It’s not happening. You’ll get the odd nut but rarely is anyone looking for anything even approaching that.

The two scenarios you posited are not even vaguely comparable in audible volume or number of voices. One is a major problem to society. The other is a fart in a hurricane.

 

[Schmeichel's Cartwheel]

Are you fecking kidding?

Do you have any links?

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/newsbeat-53736087

 

[tombombadil]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/newsbeat-53736087

Thanks. That's a good laugh.

 

[rcoobc]

Considering UK is entering lockdown, every one is already automatically self isolating. Which basically renders any more additional testing moot. The key purpose of the lockdown is to auto isolate everyone until the hidden infections clear off and therefore breaking the chain of infections, after all. But if the lockdown is too lax, you may be right that more testing may be necessary. But that is again, moot, because do you even have the capacity to test and contact trace even more?

We certainly have additional testing available in the form of the lateral flow tests. These were designed to test those with symptoms, not those without.

Pogue posted a study from Birmingham Uni showing they are completely ineffective when testing those without symptoms. Which is what the UK gov is using them for.

I think it would be better if, when booking a test, it asks you what symptoms you have.

If the three main symptoms you would self isolate and then get a PCR test. If other symptoms, you would get a lateral flow test (but have to self isolate until then).

Over time this could actually reduce the requirement on test, track and trace because it would reduce the number of people infected.

Or it wouldn't work. I don't know.

 

[rcoobc]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/newsbeat-53736087

That's actually refreshing.. at least the BBC seem somewhat aware people are going to break the rules regardless.

Even if they then expect them to not kiss, not do oral and to always wear a condom

 

[finneh]

Stop applying political labels. You’re so goddamn dramatic when you’re on the hook.

If you think there’s a large number of people in this country that are advocating Chinese lockdown methods then you’re consuming the wrong media. It’s not happening. You’ll get the odd nut but rarely is anyone looking for anything even approaching that.

The two scenarios you posited are not even vaguely comparable in audible volume or number of voices. One is a major problem to society. The other is a fart in a hurricane.

On this forum there's far more people sympathetic to the China approach than think the virus is a hoax. If memory serves there was literally a thread asking if we should be more like China a few months ago.

In terms of threats to Western society I would put the use of fear as a tool to propagate totalitarian ideals far above a small minority of nut jobs believing the virus is a hoax. Hell our Home Secretary is regularly guilty of the former, whilst I've seen no member of the cabinet promoting Covid denial.

 

[rcoobc]

On this forum there's far more people sympathetic to the China approach than think the virus is a hoax. If memory serves there was literally a thread asking if we should be more like China a few months ago.

In terms of threats to Western society I would put the use of fear as a tool to propagate totalitarian ideals far above a small minority of nut jobs believing the virus is a hoax. Hell our Home Secretary is regularly guilty of the former, whilst I've seen no member of the cabinet promoting Covid denial.

I mean. Just look at New Zealand

 

[tombombadil]

We certainly have additional testing available in the form of the lateral flow tests. These were designed to test those with symptoms, not those without.

Pogue posted a study from Birmingham Uni showing they are completely ineffective when testing those without symptoms. Which is what the UK gov is using them for.

I think it would beg better if, when booking a test, it asks you what symptoms you have.

If the three main symptoms you would self isolate and then get a PCR test. If oth symptoms, you would get a lateral flow test (but have to self isolate until then).

Over time this could actually reduce the requirement on test, track and trace because it would reduce the number of people infected.

Or it wouldn't work. I don't know.

I get what you mean. It's just that, at this point, there may no longer be a purpose to test a person unless he needs to get medical attention.

Some of the guidance I've read basically describe drawing a line between containment and mitigation.

If it is under control, containment is in play and you focus on testing and tracing.

If you lose control, you move to mitigation. You give up on unnecessary testing. You stop tracing altogether. You keep everyone isolated and focus on those that need medical attention.

E.g. WHO documentation below. Page 29.

https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/managing-epidemics-interactive.pdf

The point is, when resources become stretched, you need to change your priorities.

 

[finneh]

I mean. Just look at New Zealand

If you're referring to a Covid zero approach I don't believe they ever had widespread community transmission. That's disregarding the key differences between both countries (if I've misread your point apologies).

 

[arnie_ni]

Hospital in ni appealing for any staff close to come in and work

 

[jojojo]

I understand your reaction . When BFA Hernandez posted that I initially thought he must be a hypochondriac.

It's a gutteral reaction, if someone goes against the prevailing wind of public opinion, they must be conspiracists or idiots.

Ive said it's second hand evidence, worse than circumstantial. I provided my source (my friend who is an NHS doctor).

For what it's worth the 3 people I know of who have had the vaccine so far didn't have major issues. One said she feels like her body was doing "something", and felt hot.

I'm not going to apologise for passing on information from my NHS doctor mate. If it was "my mate down the pub" sure.

In fact I've just written all that and I think that there is already studies showing people having worse reactions of they've had the viruses (of other vaccines). Let me see

I think the Pfizer/Moderna vaccines in particular are known to trigger side-effects in a lot of people - and to trigger severe (that potentially keep you off work for a day or two) side-effects in more people than we're used to with flu jabs for example. The Moderna jab in particular has something like 10% of people experiencing severe fatigue after the second jab.

The numbers were released as part of the clinical trials Phase3 report, but as those are really long documents I'll link to a press report instead: https://www.vox.com/22158238/covid-19-vaccine-side-effects-explained

As Pogue said - some people get flu like symptoms (fatigue, headache, joint pain etc). Mostly mild, but in a significant number it's more severe (but generally shortterm). I've read some of the vaccine advisors commenting that for a hospital (for example) it would be better not to vaccinate all the staff in a particular department on a single day - just to reduce the odds of having a bunch of people absent or unable to work normally the next morning.

 

[rcoobc]

I think the Pfizer/Moderna vaccines in particular are known to trigger side-effects in a lot of people - and to trigger severe (that potentially keep you off work for a day or two) side-effects in more people than we're used to with flu jabs for example. The Moderna jab in particular has something like 10% of people experiencing severe fatigue after the second jab.

The numbers were released as part of the clinical trials Phase3 report, but as those are really long documents I'll link to a press report instead: https://www.vox.com/22158238/covid-19-vaccine-side-effects-explained

As Pogue said - some people get flu like symptoms (fatigue, headache, joint pain etc). Mostly mild, but in a significant number it's more severe (but generally shortterm). I've read some of the vaccine advisors commenting that for a hospital (for example) it would be better not to vaccinate all the staff in a particular department on a single day - just to reduce the odds of having a bunch of people absent or unable to work normally the next morning.

Thanks. If you accept my hypothesis that side effects are caused by the bodies immune reaction (hence worse for the 2nd jab) and that a lot of NHS staff have already had COVID - then the effects could be even worse for NHS staff compared with random portions of the population.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Thanks. If you accept my hypothesis that side effects are caused by the bodies immune reaction (hence worse for the 2nd jab) and that a lot of NHS staff have already had COVID - then the effects could be even worse for NHS staff compared with random portions of the population.

An immunologist in Ireland is arguing that vaccinating people with documented prior infection is a waste of a finite resource.

There was a paper in the NEJM last week looking at reinfection amongst HCWs. Only 2 out of 223* that had previous confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection became re-infected and both were asymptomatic, whereas there were 223 infections among 11,364 workers that had not previously been infected with SARS-CoV-2. That works out as efficacy better than any of the vaccines. 100% protection against symptomatic covid. Considering the risk of missing a couple of days off work when they’re vaccinated I’d be inclined to agree with him.

Although there’s a bit of a moral issue here too. You could argue they deserve the extra reassurance of a vaccine for continuing to put themselves in harm’s way.



*Which scuppers the idea that the half a dozen cases of reinfection that made headlines up to now were a true reflection of incidence. It was always likely that there were many thousands more cases of reinfection that weren’t picked up and written about.

@Wibble

 

[rcoobc]

An immunologist in Ireland is arguing that vaccinating people with documented prior infection is a waste of a finite resource.

There was a paper in the NEJM last week looking at reinfection amongst HCWs. Only 2 out of 223 that had previous confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection became re-infected and both were asymptomatic, whereas there were 223 infections among 11,364 workers that had not previously been infected with SARS-CoV-2. That adds up to 100% efficacy. Better than any of the vaccines. Considering the risk of missing a couple of days off work when they’re vaccinated I’d be inclined to agree with him.

Although there’s a bit of a moral issue here too. You could argue they deserve the extra reassurance of a vaccine for continuing to put themselves in harm’s way.

Also, they regularly have contact with the elderly etc.

I would very much like for all teachers to be vaccinated, however.

 

[DavidDeSchmikes]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Wolverine]

I had mine this weekend. Feel a bit crap, arm hurty. Maybe a bit if lethargy, not helped by having a very hyper toddler. But dosing up on regular ibuprofen and paracetamol. More than worth it. Pfizer vaccine, my second dose is in March.

Will be spending a large part of next few months seeing people face to face for consultations and vaccinations in my GP practice. feel infinitely better about things now.

Hearing more or less the same from most of my colleagues and HCW friends.