[COVID-19] General Discussion

[Kiwiwomble]

Covid: Thousands sign petition against vaccine passports

More than 200,000 people are urging the government not to introduce documents offering proof of vaccination.

www.bbc.co.uk

200,000 signed against Vaccine passports.

am i missing something? Vaccine passports are already a thing, had to have several shots before we could travel through Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, had to show them at customs

 

[Bada-Bing!]

am i missing something? Vaccine passports are already a thing, had to have several shots before we could travel through Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, had to show them at customs

They are talking about implementing the COVID vaccine passport with the NHS app.

I have my card for first jab and will just keep that and the second one to prove it.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

So in theory 1 case in 10 million yes a concern but each individual will choose their concern over this.

It's an exponential virus Duncanb. Hence why they need to trace the 6 and all their contacts and isolate ASAP.

 

[Which Tyler]

It's an exponential virus Duncanb. Hence why they need to trace the 6 and all their contacts and isolate ASAP.

If only we had a functional test and trace system.

It's also not only 6. We're sequencing about 1 in 10 to 1 in 20 of the positive test found. meaning that the real number is likely to be between 60 and 120 - another reason why a functional test and trace system is vital. We need to find all of them, and trace where it came from; with that many, there's a strong chance that community transmission of B 1.1.248 is already taking place. If you don't get on top of it at small numbers, and clamp down hard; we'll be up the creak in a couple of months - coinciding nicely with opening up after lockdown.

IIRC B 1.1.248 isn't particularly more transmissible / contagious, certainly not more than C 1.1.7 - it's "just" that the current vaccines aren't as effective against it.
Our national policy for ending this thing is to rely on vaccines.

If only we, the EU, the world* had taken this a touch more seriously a year ago; and made some sort of effort to stop the numbers rising to such huge levels in the first place that massive numbers of variations was absolutely inevitable. I know the hope was that those variations would settle down to a more contagious, less severe version - but that was never guaranteed (especially with modern medicine) and ignored all the steps before then.



*I mostly blame Europe as we had the first major outbreak, and most of the world got it from us. We also set an example in doing too little too late.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

@WT that is what I am a little worried about. With the Astra vaccine I have had being less effective against the SA virus and now this Brazilian variant.

Summer holidays and peeps going abroad and coming back is just going to contribute to more variants coming back.

Outsourcing testing and tracing is non-sensical. This should have been given to local authorities. Even worse is these tracers are on rolling contracts and can be sacked.

COVID-19: 'Large number' of contact tracers to be sacked - as PM prepares to announce loosening of lockdown

The exact number of contact tracers who are losing their job is unknown.

www.google.co.uk

Right on cue they announced on BBC breakfast news about losing the whereabouts of 1 of the infected with the Brazilian variant.

Covid-19: Brazil variant case in England hunted by officials

The whereabouts of one infected person is unknown, as they did not give their full contact details.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Which Tyler]

Outsourcing testing and tracing is non-sensical. This should have been given to local authorities. Even worse is these tracers are on rolling contracts and can be sacked.

The Serco system has been frankly bizarre from the start.
Example 1 - my Dad, he's a retired GP; so Serco desparetly want people like him to join the top rank of tracers, making the difficult clinical decisions. In order to do so, he had to renew his licence with the GMC - which he did. GMC renewed his licence "until further notice" Serco required an end date for his licence, and refused to talk to the GMC. Which all means, he never actually qualified as a case handler.

Example 2 - I've a friend who registered with Serco as a bottom rank tracers - her job was to call people who tested positive, advice them about self-isolation and what that meant, guide them to make other arrangements for food deliveries etc etc; and ask them where they'd been and who they'd been with over the previous 48 hours before testing. the basic stuff. She was employed by Serco for about 3 months, and had not one single patient to contact. She quit, feeling useless and fraudulent (she was still being paid for 40 hours a week), and got a job delivering food for Sainsburys.

Examples 3+ - I've numerous colleagues who had been employed by Serco as tier 2 tracers - sorting out some of the more complicated ones, applying some relatively basic clinical decision makig processes etc. Most of them were fired in the summer as Serco were downsizing tier 2 - because they cost too much.


The overall impression I get is that it's only ever been about lining pockets, and doing the bare minimum - providing an actual service hasn't even been a secondary consideration.
As an aside, Serco's profits rose by something like 35% over the last 12 months, and shares by about 20% - resulting in a windfall payment to share holders; but I'm sure that has nothing to do with anything.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Covid: Italy blocks AstraZeneca vaccine shipment to Australia

The bar on shipping 250,000 doses amid a row with the firm is backed by the EU.

www.bbc.com

Will say unlike the UK Aus certainly doesn't seem as badly impacted by COVID as the EU.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Covid: Italy blocks AstraZeneca vaccine shipment to Australia

The bar on shipping 250,000 doses amid a row with the firm is backed by the EU.

www.bbc.com

Will say unlike the UK Aus certainly doesn't seem as badly impacted by COVID as the EU.

sure, greater good and all, we'll suck it up

but, aussie gets in early to support the vaccine development and place orders, goes hard into lockdown, fights off second and third waves, population largely does the "right thing" and follows the rules...largely because they the vaccine is coming...then, nope

maybe we all should have taken the **** and let it spread so we could say it was needed

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

sure, greater good and all, we'll suck it up

but, aussie gets in early to support the vaccine development and place orders, goes hard into lockdown, fights off second and third waves, population largely does the "right thing" and follows the rules...largely because they the vaccine is coming...then, nope

maybe we all should have taken the **** and let it spread so we could say it was needed

It's a company based in Europe that has received massive EU funding and are failing to satisfy their contract with the EU. This is just Italy enforcing a contract.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

It's a company based in Europe that has received massive EU funding and are failing to satisfy their contract with the EU. This is just Italy enforcing a contract.

and the contract the Aussie government has? im not saying they dont have the right to do it but i think people in aussie has a small right to be slightly annoyed

the Australian government aren't rocking up now trying to buy off the shelf, they were one of if not the first to place orders back in the middle of last year

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

and the contract the Aussie government has? im not saying they dont have the right to do it but i think people in aussie has a small right to be slightly annoyed

the Australian government aren't rocking up now trying to buy off the shelf, they were one of if not the first to place orders back in the middle of last year

Yeah you should be annoyed, but at AZ not the EU. They're the ones who've made multiple contracts that they can't satisfy and have caused a tonne of problems as a result.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Yeah you should be annoyed, but at AZ not the EU. They're the ones who've made multiple contracts that they can't satisfy and have caused a tonne of problems as a result.

i didnt say i was annoyed at the EU....

the annoyance i have is kind of just at the argument/justification of "you dont need it", we dont "need" it because we've had some for of restrictions since MAR last year

 

[The Seeker]

'When will it end?': How a changing virus is reshaping scientists’ views on COVID-19

Chris Murray, a University of Washington disease expert whose projections on COVID-19 infections and deaths are closely followed worldwide, is changing his assumptions about the course of the pandemic.

www.reuters.com

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Last I heard a few of the EU countries remained openly sceptical on AZ jab in older people has that changed?

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Last I heard a few of the EU countries remained openly sceptical on AZ jab in older people has that changed?

Yes, France, Belgium and Germany now changed policy for over 65s.

Germany approves AstraZeneca jab for over-65s - BBC News

The decision comes after Chancellor Merkel said data showed the jab was effective for the elderly too.

www.google.co.uk

 

[Which Tyler]

Last I heard a few of the EU countries remained openly sceptical on AZ jab in older people has that changed?

The problem was that the original trials didn't have many over 65 YoA subjects; so there was an assumption, but no evidence that it would work for that cohort.
That evidence has come in over the last week or so, with data analysis from the UK (Scotland's data came in at the fag end of February (26th?), England's came in beginning of March (2nd)).

We've also now got good evidence that there's no need to give Pfizer's second dose before 5 weeks; and no need to give AstraZeneca's before 6 weeks.
Pfizer's effects plateau in the 5th week (but no sign of degrading yet as of 21st Feb data point); whilst AZ's hasn't plateaud yet (as of 21st Feb data point).


Of course, our charming media don't understand all this (and take great [false] pride in AZ being a purely British vaccine), so are claiming that the EU / Macron / Whoever had said that AZ doesn't work in the elderly (as far as I can tell, no-one had said that) and are now proven categorically wrong and unethical in a Great British Underdog story.
Reality is that the UK worked under an assumption, with the political calculus being "what's the worst that can happen?"; whilst the EU waited an extra few weeks to make sure they actually knew the answers (and used PFizer in the mean-time to vaccinate those populations).


It was similar with the aprovals. The UK approved Pfizer and AZ under emergency regulations (so fast-tracked, and lower level of evidence required); whilst the EU approved under standard regulations (so it took longer, and required a more in-depth analysis of the data - and came up with more stringent recommendations for use).
Absolutely not that the UK is better, or more efficient than the EU, or that we could only do this sue to Brexit - we simply used a different regulation, which came with different benefits and different risks

 

[McTallshort]

The problem was that the original trials didn't have many over 65 YoA subjects; so there was an assumption, but no evidence that it would work for that cohort.
That evidence has come in over the last week or so, with data analysis from the UK (Scotland's data came in at the fag end of February (26th?), England's came in beginning of March (2nd)).

We've also now got good evidence that there's no need to give Pfizer's second dose before 5 weeks; and no need to give AstraZeneca's before 6 weeks.
Pfizer's effects plateau in the 5th week (but no sign of degrading yet as of 21st Feb data point); whilst AZ's hasn't plateaud yet (as of 21st Feb data point).


Of course, our charming media don't understand all this (and take great [false] pride in AZ being a purely British vaccine), so are claiming that the EU / Macron / Whoever had said that AZ doesn't work in the elderly (as far as I can tell, no-one had said that) and are now proven categorically wrong and unethical in a Great British Underdog story.
Reality is that the UK worked under an assumption, with the political calculus being "what's the worst that can happen?"; whilst the EU waited an extra few weeks to make sure they actually knew the answers (and used PFizer in the mean-time to vaccinate those populations).


It was similar with the aprovals. The UK approved Pfizer and AZ under emergency regulations (so fast-tracked, and lower level of evidence required); whilst the EU approved under standard regulations (so it took longer, and required a more in-depth analysis of the data - and came up with more stringent recommendations for use).
Absolutely not that the UK is better, or more efficient than the EU, or that we could only do this sue to Brexit - we simply used a different regulation, which came with different benefits and different risks

All true but didn't Macron say the AZ jab was "quasi-ineffective" for over 65s before any information was available?

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Yeah I remember Macron making a very trumpian statement about it, and when pressed if there was any evidence basically said "no, but I think it doesn't work"

 

[Which Tyler]

All true but didn't Macron say the AZ jab was "quasi-ineffective" for over 65s before any information was available?

He went too far, but allowed himself more wriggle room than the British media did - not enough, but more.

"Today we think that it is quasi-ineffective for people over 65. What I can tell you officially today is that the early results we have are not encouraging for 60 to 65-year-old people concerning AstraZeneca.

 

[BiggusLaddus]

There is no wiggle room in that statement, he was just talking through his arse.