Pfizer vaccine approved

[serrac]

8 minutes ago, ditchman said:

will you have the vaccine ?

Not anytime soon.
But as I said in an earlier post I think it's going to be pretty well impossible for anyone to resist the level of coercion that will be applied long term. No jab = no work, no travel, no medical services etc etc

[ditchman]

11 hours ago, serrac said:

Not anytime soon.
But as I said in an earlier post I think it's going to be pretty well impossible for anyone to resist the level of coercion that will be applied long term. No jab = no work, no travel, no medical services etc etc

well ....at least the govt' respects our right to make our own desicion about whether we take it or not...........you have made your choice on the grounds of your knowledge....and belief....as to ...i..........

at least you arnt refusing it because aliens have put micro chips in the preparation....and we are all going to turn into "flatearthers"..and join the lizard people from the planet Zog...(like the royal family)..

 

keep safe

[Rewulf]

12 hours ago, serrac said:

But as I said in an earlier post I think it's going to be pretty well impossible for anyone to resist the level of coercion that will be applied long term. No jab = no work, no travel, no medical services etc etc

For a novell virus with a base mortality rate of 0.1 %
A rate that is without a doubt going to fall as time goes by , without any vaccine intervention whatsoever.

[ordnance]

7 hours ago, Rewulf said:

For a novell virus with a base mortality rate of 0.1 %
A rate that is without a doubt going to fall as time goes by , without any vaccine intervention whatsoever.

Where did you get the 0.1 % from. 

[Rewulf]

15 hours ago, ordnance said:

Where did you get the 0.1 % from. 

The UK government, its updated daily https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths

Despite some members of the scientific community still clinging to a 1% or even higher rate.
The figures of deaths per 100,000 of the population are 0.1 %

Deaths within 28 days of positive test by area

Total number of deaths since the start of the pandemic of people who had had a positive test result for COVID-19 and died within 28 days of the first positive test. Data from the four nations are not directly comparable as methodologies and inclusion criteria vary. Only data available for the latest reported date are shown.

Click to display contentNationClick to display contentRegionClick to display contentUpper tier LAClick to display contentLower tier LAClick to display contentAbout

Nation

Showing a table of the data

AreaSorted column (descending) - Apply ascending sort.	DeathsUnsorted column - Apply ascending sort.	Rate per 100,000 populationUnsorted column - Apply ascending sort.
Wales	2,789	88.5
Scotland	4,039	73.9
Northern Ireland	1,099	58
England	55,155	98

 

Deaths with COVID-19 on the death certificate by area

Total number of deaths since the start of the pandemic of people whose death certificate mentioned COVID-19 as one of the causes. The data are published weekly by the ONS, NRS and NISRA and there is a lag in reporting of at least 11 days because the data are based on death registrations. Only data available for the latest reported date are shown.

Click to display contentNationClick to display contentRegionClick to display contentUpper tier LAClick to display contentAbout

Nation

Showing a table of the data

AreaSorted column (descending) - Apply ascending sort.	DeathsUnsorted column - Apply ascending sort.	Rate per 100,000 populationUnsorted column - Apply ascending sort.
Wales	3,671	116.4
Scotland	5,634	103.1
Northern Ireland	1,382	73
England	62,438	110.9

And thats WITH the figures being 'massaged' higher, via the 28 day rule , and the 'mentioned on DC criteria'

[JDog]

In North East Lincolnshire the death rate is 0.08%. As recently as last week the incidence of Covid infections as a % of the population was reported to be the highest in the country.

[Rewulf]

4 minutes ago, JDog said:

In North East Lincolnshire the death rate is 0.08%. As recently as last week the incidence of Covid infections as a % of the population was reported to be the highest in the country.

There was a point where 400 per 100,000 infection rate was considered high.
Now the goal posts have been moved , and 200 is considered high.

Yet parts of S.Wales are approaching 700 and there are pockets of similar if not higher all around the country.
East London has some very high rates, yet still sits in tier 2  ?
Nottingham has one very small pocket, yet has been told to expect to remain in tier 3 ?

The fact remains though, all this is based on data collected from testing, however accurate , or not that might be.
The base line mortality rate is still around 0.1 % depending on region , NI for example is closer to 0.06, I suspect largely because they collate the data differently (ie , dont blame every other death on covid no matter what)

So lets get our heads round this ...0.1 % on AVERAGE mortality rate (thats not from those infected , thats across the whole population)
Obviously , the older you get the higher the percentage, but then that applies to all kinds of things that can kill you.
And sad to say , covid has caused the deaths of more over 70s than any other age group by far.
But then , so has heart disease , cancer, flu and pneumonia .
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsduetocoronaviruscovid19comparedwithdeathsfrominfluenzaandpneumoniaenglandandwales/deathsoccurringbetween1januaryand31august2020

Notice in this Gov link the extremely low prevalence of flu deaths this year, compared to the 5 year  average of 17000 pa .

The real question is , based on this information and a mortality rate that may be 4 -5 times our average annual flu death toll, why have we wrecked our economy , had multiple lockdowns, and (probably) mandatory vaccination programs, with  no real end in sight.
Not to mention a collateral death toll from people who missed cancer or vascular screenings or treatment.
 

										9

[ordnance]

Quote

The real question is , based on this information and a mortality rate that may be 4 -5 times our average annual flu death toll, why have we wrecked our economy , had multiple lockdowns, and (probably) mandatory vaccination programs, with  no real end in sight.
Not to mention a collateral death toll from people who missed cancer or vascular screenings or treatment.

There is the option of just letting it run with no control, but the hospitals would be overwhelmed. There would be a collateral death toll with that option, with ICU beds full people that needed them for other reasons would have to be left to die. 

Edited December 11, 2020 by ordnance

[serrac]

On 10/12/2020 at 11:25, Rewulf said:

For a novell virus with a base mortality rate of 0.1 %
A rate that is without a doubt going to fall as time goes by , without any vaccine intervention whatsoever.

Plus what the general public seem to believe the vaccine will do for them might be a tad optimistic.

The "95% effective" claim sounds very impressive but that's referring to relative risk.

If we only consider the 162 cases in the placebo group vs the 8 in the vaccine group then the maths work something like this:
(162-8)/162x100 = 95% (voila 95% effective!)
i.e. we assume that if the 162 in the placebo group had been in the vaccine group only 8 would have been infected, saving 154 from having Covid symptoms.

But in fact there were also 21838 in the placebo group who did not get sick and if this is expressed in terms of absolute risk (Assuming an equal split between vaccine and placebo groups) we get:

Placebo: 
Those in the placebo group had a (22000−162)÷22000×100=99.26% chance of not getting sick with Covid

Vaccine:
Those in the vaccine group had a (22000-8)÷22000×100=99.96% chance of not getting sick with Covid

Therefore the vaccine reduces your chances of developing mild to moderate Covid symptoms by a grand total of 0.7%

~~~

There are slight variations on these figures floating around the interweb
i.e. https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/95-vaccine-efficacy-not-so-fast/

 

 

 

[Rewulf]

4 hours ago, ordnance said:

There is the option of just letting it run with no control, but the hospitals would be overwhelmed. There would be a collateral death toll with that option, with ICU beds full people that needed them for other reasons would have to be left to die. 

Literally no one advocated doing nothing. 

Did we not build nightingale hospitals, source 10 s of 1000s of ventilators to prevent ICU s becoming overwhelmed? 

Did lockdowns really make them totally redundant, with not a single patient ever needing to use one? 

Or was the whole thing simply blown out of all proportion? 

[Saltings]

was not the initial thought heard immunity      then o dear lockdown two weeks late  many died  media rinsing it   everyone wrong       now coventry tier 3 after second lockdown   still wrong         labour    stama lock down for three weeks and be done  wales did that there are really in the **** now       going up again fast         tier 3 going down       from the start stay safe until vaccine            southern Irelands pubs just open up last week on a Saturday night only  for a few hours    pubs who did food takeaway only all through      and 20 miles from home   travel for work   vitals or medical       however the cities took the **** same as here    students house parties you name it   chav parties  Gardaí    stretched  inc fines         rural areas did as asked  as here     uk not doing too bad look at other country's        sweeden opening up travel and skiing    oops        America  thanksgiving  struggling  now       give it another couple of weeks  re death toll                   then work out if its worth traveling across the country  to hug granma and pappy for x mass include aunties and uncles  inc fuel stops  flowers for a grave      food        you  could be    typhoid Mary    and kill them     or getaway to the slopes or sun and bring it back sat on a plane for hours         xmas will be talk to the outlaws skype or phone call  eat some food and watch **** tv or take the dog a walk  

[ordnance]

14 hours ago, Rewulf said:

Literally no one advocated doing nothing. 

Did we not build nightingale hospitals, source 10 s of 1000s of ventilators to prevent ICU s becoming overwhelmed? 

Did lockdowns really make them totally redundant, with not a single patient ever needing to use one? 

Or was the whole thing simply blown out of all proportion? 

The infection rates went down dramality during lockdown, so yes it prevented the  NHS being overwhelmed and the need for nightingale hospitals. If they were needed and the government had not built them then the same ones criticizing the government for being ready, would be winning that they were not papered. Sometimes government's have to prepare for the worst, and work and hope for the best. PS Where did you get the figure that  10 s of 1000s of ventilators were sourced.  

[Rewulf]

25 minutes ago, ordnance said:

PS Where did you get the figure that  10 s of 1000s of ventilators were sourced

I hear Dyson has plenty going cheap.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/26/tech/dyson-ventilators-coronavirus/index.html

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-52409359

Ironically they got some from ChYna too 😃

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/british-doctors-warn-chinese-ventilators-could-kill-if-used-hospitals-n1194046

[AVB]

As it turns out the vast number of ventilators they bought weren’t needed as it turns out that in the vast majority of cases it was better to give patients oxygen rather than ventilate. 
 

As it has been confirmed that a significant majority of covid infections came from hospitals (source Chris Whitty) and not pubs or restaurants it would have been better, imo, to isolate all covid patients in the Nightingales rather than try to segregate hospitals into covid/non-covid which obviously failed disastrously. 

[Rewulf]

24 minutes ago, AVB said:

As it has been confirmed that a significant majority of covid infections came from hospitals (source Chris Whitty) and not pubs or restaurants it would have been better, imo, to isolate all covid patients in the Nightingales rather than try to segregate hospitals into covid/non-covid which obviously failed disastrously. 

I have yet to hear one utterance of government or SAGE ,admitting they got anything wrong yet, despite the fact that they consistently have.
What is perplexing , is they seem hell bent on continuing with the same set of bad data, bad advice, and bad strategy.

[serrac]

17 hours ago, AVB said:

 rather than try to segregate hospitals into covid/non-covid which obviously failed disastrously. 

Not even sure they tried that very hard.

My wife's uncle, 96 years old and suffering dementia but still living at home with carer support had a fall and was taken into hospital in Glasgow.  According to his daughter he was in a ward with a Covid patient.

My daughter-in-law is a nurse in a large Dundee hospital and says they do not segregate suspected Covid patients until confirmed diagnosis as it would be too resource costly to do otherwise.

[serrac]

18 hours ago, ordnance said:

The infection rates went down dramality during lockdown

 

Lockdown started mid March and it seems to me the infection rates did not begin to significantly decline until May, which could just as readily be explained by warmer weather allowing people to spend more time outdoors and greater exposure to sunlight boosting vitamin-d levels.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/

[ordnance]

8 hours ago, serrac said:

 

Lockdown started mid March and it seems to me the infection rates did not begin to significantly decline until May, which could just as readily be explained by warmer weather allowing people to spend more time outdoors and greater exposure to sunlight boosting vitamin-d levels.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/

The virus spreads from person to person, if they are not getting together in pubs clubs work etc, then that cuts down the infection rate, its not rocket science. Vitamins can possibly help people fight the virus, they do not effect the transmissions. 

Quote

 

Hot weather. Cold weather. COVID-19 doesn’t care.

Researchers at the University of Texas at Austin say the novel coronavirus spreads with about the same efficiency regardless of air temperature and humidity.

 

 

Edited December 13, 2020 by ordnance

[ferguson_tom]

On 12/12/2020 at 15:33, Rewulf said:

I have yet to hear one utterance of government or SAGE ,admitting they got anything wrong yet, despite the fact that they consistently have.
What is perplexing , is they seem hell bent on continuing with the same set of bad data, bad advice, and bad strategy.

Because following the current narrative of trashing the economy, ruining the livelihoods of millions of people, running an authoritarian state, stopping families being together can all be blamed on Covid-19 and this excuse will pass pretty much any scrutiny in the future.

Actually doing what may be best for the nation, as harsh as it may be, will mean any deaths will be the fault of the governments for "not doing enough" and politically will be used against them for years to come. 

[Raja Clavata]

On 12/12/2020 at 15:33, Rewulf said:

I have yet to hear one utterance of government or SAGE ,admitting they got anything wrong yet, despite the fact that they consistently have.
What is perplexing , is they seem hell bent on continuing with the same set of bad data, bad advice, and bad strategy.

From what I hear, it's the proverbial mother of all CF's since the scientists were tempered by the Politicians with regards to what they were allowed to say and the Politicians spun it all to suit their agenda which meant pretty much everyone got lost in trying to decipher the scientific facts vs the spin vs the arrant nonsense.

Even learned observers privately admit getting lost as a result of all the misinformation.

[Rewulf]

44 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Even learned observers privately admit getting lost as a result of all the misinformation.

Agreed, even doctors are beginning to wonder what's going on. 

Blind leading the blind comes to mind. 

[Saltings]

ok my daughters best friend   works  covid ward  its not as bar as first lockdown  as able to medicate better    but other illnesses not been seen or treated  

Edited December 16, 2020 by Saltings

[AVB]

I see that 137,000 have been vaccinated so far. That’s good right! Assuming that a lot of these are the most vulnerable that’s 137,000 people who are on the path to being immune. I don’t think it will be long before we break the back of the number of deaths which is the important number not the fixation with positive cases. 

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, AVB said:

I see that 137,000 have been vaccinated so far. That’s good right! Assuming that a lot of these are the most vulnerable that’s 137,000 people who are on the path to being immune. I don’t think it will be long before we break the back of the number of deaths which is the important number not the fixation with positive cases. 

I agree a good result - but this must be just the 'first half' as there is a second dose (in 21 days?) - and then there is another week or so before it is up to full protection of somewhere around 90%.  I have not heard any tales of any severe reactions so far either (other than the two nurses who both had known allergies and needed a little care)

[discobob]

53 minutes ago, AVB said:

I see that 137,000 have been vaccinated so far. That’s good right! Assuming that a lot of these are the most vulnerable that’s 137,000 people who are on the path to being immune. I don’t think it will be long before we break the back of the number of deaths which is the important number not the fixation with positive cases. 

49 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

I agree a good result - but this must be just the 'first half' as there is a second dose (in 21 days?) - and then there is another week or so before it is up to full protection of somewhere around 90%.  I have not heard any tales of any severe reactions so far either (other than the two nurses who both had known allergies and needed a little care)

It is not immunity - it is helping you handle it better if/when you do catch it - i.e. you don't get as sick - well from everything that I have heard so far - and it won't stop you passing it on either