1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Covid Vaccine

Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by Dorset_Mike, Dec 8, 2020.

  1. Dorset_Mike

    Dorset_Mike Grumpy Old Fart

    Heard at the Doctors today, they hope to commence Covid vaccinations in about 2 weeks, starting with over 80s (that includes me)and other very vulnerables, then 75-80, then 70-75 etc.
    Fingers crossed!
     
    Learning, John Farrell and Catriona like this.
  2. WillieJ

    WillieJ Well-Known Member

    Best of luck
     
  3. Catriona

    Catriona Well-Known Member

    You'll be fine!! They won't need Christmas lights for your celebration dinner! ;) :p
     
  4. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    When are they starting on the over 75s? I hope to be in circulation for a week or two before the end of the hedge laying season.
     
  5. Catriona

    Catriona Well-Known Member

    For you, I would guess into the new year probably about March next year.
     
  6. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    Sadly I think that you are correct.
     
  7. ascu75

    ascu75 Well-Known Member

    We will all be vaccinated eventually
     
  8. Malcolm_Stewart

    Malcolm_Stewart Well-Known Member

    My recent 'flu jab went OK, and I didn't feel a thing.
     
  9. Catriona

    Catriona Well-Known Member

    Instead of comparing efficacy percentages, we should really be asking what their definition of efficacy is. It seems the definition for the Oxford vaccine, is the reduction in hospital admissions and severity. I have yet to see the definition of the Pfizer vaccine, but will keep looking. It seems that this vaccine will prevent you getting the condition and associated symptoms. Quite a different definition of efficacy. I haven't found anything saying whether transmission still takes place, although I did read somewhere that Oxford still found the virus in nasal mucous afterwards.
    Need to read more, but it doesn't sound like a golden bullet.
     
  10. dream_police

    dream_police Well-Known Member

    Our mad conspiracy theory friend sent us (and all of her family) a link to a video last night imploring us to watch it before we take the vaccine. She stated that she knows that we don't agree with her views, that she wasn't an anti vaxxer, but the video would explain why we shouldn't take it.
    I don't whether to watch it out of interest, or will it more than likely make me quite mad and then spend the next several hours trying to disprove whatever it says. Or it will it be like one of those sci-fi hypnosis films that'll suck me into the same rabbit hole she lives in.
     
  11. AndyTake2

    AndyTake2 Well-Known Member

    I think these points are something which really need to be addressed.
    The various vaccines should be labelled online with bullet-point Q & A, with fair reference and comparison where needed. e.g. 'Does it stop the virus entering the system and multiplying?' to which the answer could obviously be 'yes - it kicks it's arse' or 'no, it stops the virus from multiplying by letting your body give it a kicking, but that's how the flu vaccine works as well'...or something similar.

    I think the producers of the Oxford vaccine have been honest but unclear, and it is up to the WHO to publish comparisons.
     
    Catriona likes this.
  12. Catriona

    Catriona Well-Known Member

    Goodness knows what's best to do. I've been reading up on efficacy - and effectiveness definitions re vaccines. Efficacy being how it performed on healthy selected volunteers for the trial (not the thousands who took part). In Pfizer's case this appears to be only 94 cases being the basis for their 95% efficacy claim. It puts a bit of a different slant on things. However, those 95% did not get the full illness. In Oxford's case, I don't have the numbers, but their definition of efficacy is that 90% did not end up seriously ill and in hospital. It's hard to use these measures of efficacy as a comparison. Effectiveness - means how well it does in the general population across all ages and states of health and wellbeing - afterwards, when it is distributed.
    That's it. No more reading for me!
     
  13. dream_police

    dream_police Well-Known Member

    I don't think the video will be about that. It will be more off the wall I think!
     
  14. dream_police

    dream_police Well-Known Member

    Catriona likes this.
  15. Catriona

    Catriona Well-Known Member

    I would say they need it (and have been given it) because they don't know the effectiveness or safety of the vaccine across a wide population. They have shown an efficacy rate amongst healthy individuals given the vaccine. Stated in various reports. This is a scientifically accepted measurement. That is, it doesn't seem to do harm to healthy individuals. They don't know what will happen to all sectors of the population when given the vaccine. So basically they are protecting their arses.
     
  16. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Well-Known Member

    No vaccine stops a virus entering the body.
    However the immune system kicks in whenever a virus discovered.
    All this necessarily takes a finite amount of time, it can not be instantaneous.

    However a vaccinated person is unlikely to buid up a sufficient viral load to be able to pass it on before it is destroyed.

    The load that they receive is likely to be rapidly reduced by their Defences.
    There is always the possibility that some one who has a very poor immune system, will take some while to destroy the virus in their system. This would of course meant that they would infact be suffering from a weak case of covid 19, that would soon be resolved. So the chances of passing it on would be greater than zero. But probably insignificant.
    The more often such a person comes into contact with low levels of the virus the greater the chance that their immune system will slowly build up their resistance. The act of killing off the virus strengthens the response to it.
     
  17. dangie

    dangie Senior Knobhead

    This reminds me of a post from our local Faceb**k group.
    ‘I’m not having the vaccine, you don’t know what’s in it’
    Says Donna, who buys forty beefburgers from Farmfoods for two quid.....
     
    Petrochemist and dream_police like this.
  18. dream_police

    dream_police Well-Known Member

    One thing I heard yesterday which up till then I wasn't't aware of, is how long it takes to be protected. Day 12 we have some protection. Day 21 we take the second dose, day 28 we reach as full protection as we can get. (or thereabouts anyway). I wonder how many people will think they are immune from day one and then act like it? This is really going to take some time.
     
  19. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Well-Known Member

    The Oxford vaccine has been given to twenty thousand people. With no ill effects, it contains no actual virus.
    Were it to cause problems for even one in 20,000 that would be a vastly better outcome than no vaccine.
     
  20. Catriona

    Catriona Well-Known Member

    You are missing the point. What was the basis for their efficacy claim? How many cases were analysed and what was the state of health of the subject population? The Pfizer vaccine was given to 40,000+ people, but their 95% claim is based on a sample of 94 healthy volunteers.

    I'm just saying, be honest and specific about numbers, efficacy definitions (which are specific to the producers) and the lack of knowledge about effectiveness.
     
    Geren and Andrew Flannigan like this.

Share This Page