# Vaccines



## DRW (Oct 27, 2020)

Interesting in if you intend to have the covid vaccine as soon as available or not etc.

No need to comment if you don't wish to, just interested in the results.

thanks in advance


----------



## Kellfire (Oct 27, 2020)

Absolutely.


----------



## Imurg (Oct 27, 2020)

I'll be as close to the front of the queue as I can get...


----------



## SaintHacker (Oct 27, 2020)

I will definitely have it, but not straigjt away. There are others who need it more than me


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 27, 2020)

I went immediately but I would read up about who did the vaccine, what is it's basis? I believe most being looked at are adaptions of existing vaccines and so should fundamentally be safe. As long as that is the case I would be nervous but dive in. Sooner vaccinated the sooner I can go around hugging random strangers again, sitting next to people in a pub etc.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 27, 2020)

SaintHacker said:



			I will definitely have it, but not straigjt away. There are others who need it more than me
		
Click to expand...

My understanding is that key workers, NHS, care workers and so on will automatically get priority. The rest will presumably be staggered in some way. For the flu jab this year for example they are allowing over 50's to get it but not yet as they are still jabbing other older groups.


----------



## Lilyhawk (Oct 27, 2020)

As I'll probably be in the group of people who will get last dibs on getting it I will, unless it surfaces that something is clearly wrong with it amongst people that have taken it earlier.


----------



## pauljames87 (Oct 27, 2020)

I think my wife and myself will be near front as key workers and I'll want one soon as I can to protect the kids 

The NHS deserve it more but I can see work buying some to give to staff


----------



## robinthehood (Oct 27, 2020)

Not me, i'll be relying on the power of crystals and ley lines.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Oct 27, 2020)

As an NHS worker I'll probably be offered it and the large part of me is all for having it asap but there is a part of me that would prefer to hang on and wait 2-3 months and see if the results on large scale vaccinations are proving positive in terms of no side effects and more importantly that it is seen to be working


----------



## Jimaroid (Oct 27, 2020)

I've answered undecided because there's not enough information to make a reasonable decision at this time. Without derailing, I genuinely think it's an unanswerable question at this point in time.


----------



## 126849660 (Oct 27, 2020)

Hell no


----------



## GB72 (Oct 27, 2020)

I will be looking to be vaccinated as soon as possible but then again I also volunteered for the trials and so I am willing to take the risk for the longer term and wider good.


----------



## Slab (Oct 27, 2020)

I reckon 'as soon as its available' will vary wildly around the world. I don't see us getting it here for some considerable time after places like US/UK purchase their fill. Then like many I'll wait my turn behind the essential workers & protected/public figures etc


----------



## Pathetic Shark (Oct 27, 2020)

Imurg said:



			I'll be as close to the front of the queue as I can get...
		
Click to expand...

It will be done on handicap so we can turn round and wave at Fragger


----------



## Billysboots (Oct 27, 2020)

I have a (mild) underlying condition and I’d rather take my chances with a vaccine than wind up with Covid.

I’ve had a mild case of Covid already, but remain concerned that the antibodies I had in June may now have done a bunk. Whilst there are bound to be some concerns about a new vaccine, I’m confident it won’t be used unless they are as happy as they can be that it is safe.

So if it is a choice between a vaccine and taking my chances with a severe bout of the virus, the vaccine wins by a mile.


----------



## Kellfire (Oct 27, 2020)

MrPing said:



			Hell no
		
Click to expand...

Scared of the microchips?


----------



## DRW (Oct 27, 2020)

robinthehood said:



			Not me, i'll be relying on the power of crystals and ley lines.
		
Click to expand...

Had to do a google search to find out what a ley line was, never heard of them before  

You ever thought about doing The Chase


----------



## DRW (Oct 27, 2020)

HomerJSimpson said:



			As an NHS worker I'll probably be offered it and the large part of me is all for having it asap but there is a part of me that would prefer to hang on and wait 2-3 months and see if the results on large scale vaccinations are proving positive in terms of no side effects and more importantly that it is seen to be working
		
Click to expand...

Reckon I kind of fall into the thought process(I'm nowhere near the front of the list, so time will be my friend).

Was kind of worrying to see a post about, a body collecting 1/2 billion syringes ready. Kind of made me wonder if something went wrong, its effecting a lot of  people very quickly. I appreciate it is fairly unlikely but in vaccine history (including fairly recently) there are cases of that potential. Glad there will be more than one in due course.


----------



## robinthehood (Oct 27, 2020)

DRW said:



			Had to do a google search to find out what a ley line was, never heard of them before 

You ever thought about doing The Chase

Click to expand...

They are the source of my awesomeness.


----------



## larmen (Oct 27, 2020)

Imurg said:



			I'll be as close to the front of the queue as I can get...
		
Click to expand...

That is my definition of immediately in this case. We can’t all be 1st, but when it is our turn we shouldn’t skip it.


----------



## Jamesbrown (Oct 27, 2020)

No, not immediately. I’ll treat it like new off the line phones and cars. Wait for the faults to be ironed out and updates rolled out.
Probably a few years wait unless forced to. The risk of a side effect is probably greater than me dying of it so no rush.


----------



## Tashyboy (Oct 27, 2020)

Tash being Tash am at The front of the queue like good ole days when proper January sales Were on. However Missis Tash says she will wait to see if there are any side effects which may take some time. Tash May have to re cast his vote. 🤔


----------



## Orikoru (Oct 27, 2020)

I honestly haven't thought about it. Depends what it entails or how easy it is. Would they determine if you actually need one or just hand them out willy nilly?


----------



## Lilyhawk (Oct 27, 2020)

There's already a first draft priority list of groups that would get the vaccine and in what order. I'm gonna hazard a guess that I won't be having a jab until late next year or so.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...e-on-priority-groups-for-covid-19-vaccination


older adults’ resident in a care home and care home workers1
all those 80 years of age and over and health and social care workers1
all those 75 years of age and over
all those 70 years of age and over
all those 65 years of age and over
high-risk adults under 65 years of age
moderate-risk adults under 65 years of age
all those 60 years of age and over
all those 55 years of age and over
all those 50 years of age and over
rest of the population (priority to be determined)2


----------



## IanM (Oct 27, 2020)

Sorry, what was the question?  The tin-foil on my head slipped over my eyes!  

I did see something about how long flu vaccine took to do....  of course science has moved on since then!  So hope it is quicker!


----------



## Ethan (Oct 27, 2020)

I will be happy to receive a vaccine as soon as one is approved by the EMA (the MHRA in the UK will not be ready). There is a lot of nonsense on social media about corner being cut and safety compromised. As someone who has been in medicines development for over 20 years, I am confident in the development and approval process. I wouldn't take the Russian one, though.


----------



## Billysboots (Oct 27, 2020)

Ethan said:



			I will be happy to receive a vaccine as soon as one is approved by the EMA (the MHRA in the UK will not be ready). There is a lot of nonsense on social media about corner being cut and safety compromised. *As someone who has been in medicines development for over 20 years, I am confident in the development and approval process.* I wouldn't take the Russian one, though.
		
Click to expand...

That’s good enough for me.


----------



## Mudball (Oct 27, 2020)

Depends on who makes it... i want one, but i guess there are more needy ones before me...


----------



## jim8flog (Oct 27, 2020)

There was a very interesting discussion on the box about who should get it first. Children of school age or key workers?

The arguments for either case left me totally undecided.  I am in the elderly at risk class but would hate to think I was made a priority.


----------



## jim8flog (Oct 27, 2020)

robinthehood said:



			They are the source of my awesomeness.
		
Click to expand...

 What happens when you fall off one?


----------



## Kellfire (Oct 27, 2020)

jim8flog said:



			There was a very interesting discussion on the box about who should get it first. Children of school age or key workers?

The arguments for either case left me totally undecided.  I am in the elderly at risk class but would hate to think I was made a priority.
		
Click to expand...

If we want school to stay active, I think primary school children must be high up the list.


----------



## GB72 (Oct 27, 2020)

I would certainly have teachers and pupils at the top of the list. It should be, in comparison to other sectors, a far quicker and easier process to vaccinate schools. My only issue there is that we know what a hot potato kids and vaccines has been in other areas.


----------



## Ethan (Oct 27, 2020)

The logical way to prioritise is by benefit-risk, that is those who stand to benefit most compared to the incremental risk of taking the vaccine compared to not getting it. That is the basis of the JCVI prioritisation, although it is done rather crudely. There is an argument that high risk people under 65 should be prioritised before fit and well older people not in care homes or shielding, but the process is probably designed at least in part to allow bureaucrats to manage it.

I also suspect that private companies will make their own arrangements so you may well be offered a jab by your employer outside of that system well before your number comes up in the NHS process.


----------



## Tashyboy (Oct 27, 2020)

Lilyhawk said:



			There's already a first draft priority list of groups that would get the vaccine and in what order. I'm gonna hazard a guess that I won't be having a jab until late next year or so.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...e-on-priority-groups-for-covid-19-vaccination


older adults’ resident in a care home and care home workers1
all those 80 years of age and over and health and social care workers1
all those 75 years of age and over
all those 70 years of age and over
all those 65 years of age and over
high-risk adults under 65 years of age
moderate-risk adults under 65 years of age
all those 60 years of age and over
all those 55 years of age and over
all those 50 years of age and over
rest of the population (priority to be determined)2


Click to expand...

been on the site and had a little read of that, I find it quite ironic that number one( residents in a care home). I fully understand and agree with that. But what I find strange is that care homes seem to of been left in the lurch when this covid outbreak first hit.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 27, 2020)

Kellfire said:



			If we want school to stay active, I think primary school children must be high up the list.
		
Click to expand...

As kids are largely unaffected by it, why? The same seems to be the case up to and including university students. I'm not saying don't vaccinate them but why early? Teachers and lecturers, absolutely. 

Incidentally, I'm not trying to bump up the list. I'll be one of the last to get jabbed priority wise.


----------



## pendodave (Oct 27, 2020)

I'm in no rush. Not particularly high risk.
My wife and many of our friends work in the development of new drugs for a multinational pharmaceutical company.... none of them are in a great rush either...it's hard to overstate how much this approval (when it comes) has been accelerated.


----------



## HampshireHog (Oct 27, 2020)

pendodave said:



			I'm in no rush. Not particularly high risk.
My wife and many of our friends work in the development of new drugs for a multinational pharmaceutical company.... none of them are in a great rush either...it's hard to overstate how much this approval (when it comes) has been accelerated.
		
Click to expand...

My wife is involved in the clinical trials from what she tell me it feels very much like the scene in the Martian where they start skipping the safety protocols to meet the launch date, my analogy not hers.  That being said she says she would have the vaccine straight away.  I on the other hand would hold fire.


----------



## Kellfire (Oct 27, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			As kids are largely unaffected by it, why? The same seems to be the case up to and including university students. I'm not saying don't vaccinate them but why early? Teachers and lecturers, absolutely.

Incidentally, I'm not trying to bump up the list. I'll be one of the last to get jabbed priority wise.
		
Click to expand...

Because they can’t socially distance in the classroom environment as easily as adults can, simply due to their lack of social awareness and understanding the repercussions.


----------



## Ethan (Oct 27, 2020)

HampshireHog said:



			My wife is involved in the clinical trials from what she tell me it feels very much like the scene in the Martian where they start skipping the safety protocols to meet the launch date, my analogy not hers.  That being said she says she would have the vaccine straight away.  I on the other hand would hold fire.
		
Click to expand...

If you wife has any evidence that safety protocols are not being observed, it is her professional and ethical responsibility to report it. 



Kellfire said:



			Because they can’t socially distance in the classroom environment as easily as adults can, simply due to their lack of social awareness and understanding the repercussions.
		
Click to expand...

Because they transmit it.



pendodave said:



			I'm in no rush. Not particularly high risk.
My wife and many of our friends work in the development of new drugs for a multinational pharmaceutical company.... none of them are in a great rush either...it's hard to overstate how much this approval (when it comes) has been accelerated.
		
Click to expand...

The development has been accelerated, but most of that is from overlapping manufacturing with clinical development. As above, if your wife and friends have any evidence of safety being compromised, they must report it. 

I know senior people in the industry working on vaccines and have seen many development programmes over the years. I am comfortable receiving the vaccine if EMA approved and am happy for others to make their own choice. It would be prudent for people not to circulate vague allegations of problems unless they have some evidence or solid examples.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Oct 27, 2020)

I don’t expect there to be any problem side effects with the vaccine.
But caution would say if there is a problem that is not foreseen then we might lose a big chunk of the key workers if they all have it at once.
Normally these things take years .


----------



## KenL (Oct 28, 2020)

Kellfire said:



			If we want school to stay active, I think primary school children must be high up the list.
		
Click to expand...

You need teachers at schools to keep them open, so I would hope they would be close to the top too.

BTW, secondary pupils do not practice social distancing.


----------



## Imurg (Oct 28, 2020)

KenL said:



			BTW, secondary pupils do not practice social distancing.
		
Click to expand...

To be fair, everybody practices it, just seems many aren't very good at it.......


----------



## Tashyboy (Oct 28, 2020)

From today’s news.

The first generation of COVID-19 vaccines "is likely to be imperfect" and "might not work for everyone", the chair of the UK Vaccine Taskforce has said.


Anyone want to change there vote. Me al follow Missis T,s advice.


----------



## Billysboots (Oct 28, 2020)

Tashyboy said:



			From today’s news.

The first generation of COVID-19 vaccines "is likely to be imperfect" and "might not work for everyone", the chair of the UK Vaccine Taskforce has said.


Anyone want to change there vote. Me al follow Missis T,s advice.
		
Click to expand...

That’s not saying they’re going to be unsafe though, is it?


----------



## GB72 (Oct 28, 2020)

Tashyboy said:



			From today’s news.

The first generation of COVID-19 vaccines "is likely to be imperfect" and "might not work for everyone", the chair of the UK Vaccine Taskforce has said.


Anyone want to change there vote. Me al follow Missis T,s advice.
		
Click to expand...

Nope, somebody has to start the ball rolling to see how it works. May as well be me as anyone else.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Oct 28, 2020)

Billysboots said:



			That’s not saying they’re going to be unsafe though, is it?
		
Click to expand...

Dosnt say it’s safe either!
It’s bound to have a bad effect on some people , law of averages.
It’s a choice we will have to make.


----------



## DRW (Oct 28, 2020)

It is very unlikely the first vaccines will be 95% vaccines, saying that I hope they are.

There are times when rushed medicines have not been a good thing and I think you have to look at the whole picture and be very balanced and not blinded on one side. Especially as vaccinating millions and millions of people and you do not know the medium to long term effects of the vaccine.

There are good reasons why vaccines normally take a lot longer than normal medicines to come to market, as you are giving it to generally healthy people......and who at this stage we do not know truly the long term effects of the vaccines(if anyone is interested I have a couple of links saved that show all the different kinds of vaccines being developed and the technology being used on the vaccine types. Quite an interesting read and almost all of them are very clever)

You have to bear in mind that this viruses death rate is fairly low for the under 50s or even under 60s(estimates now less than 1% even some lower giving it as lower than 0.5%). So any bad vaccines could give worse results if side effects filter though. I don't care what the big chiefs say tbh, they are not truly independent and do not know the long term effects(if any), until longer term comes.

So for an example Swine Flu vaccine, there were some nasty side effects for the younger generation :-

https://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/...1n1_safety_assessing/narcolepsy_statement/en/

As clubchamp98 says its a choice we will have to make and for certain I am glad I do not have young children that I have to decide for, as they are the safest from the virus anyway. Think it is an easy choice for the much older 70-80+ year olds who have underlying conditions tho.

This is why I was interested in the poll results, as the whole is far from clear for many and why I am probably in the camp of wait and see for a while, which I will be anyway as the vaccine will not be there for me initially as they are more deserving pressing cases/people.


----------



## bobmac (Oct 28, 2020)

clubchamp98 said:



			Dosnt say it’s safe either!
*It’s bound to have a bad effect on some people , law of averages.*
It’s a choice we will have to make.
		
Click to expand...

Going from ''It might not work for everyone'' to ''It’s bound to have a bad effect on some people'' is a bit of a leap.


----------



## Ethan (Oct 28, 2020)

DRW said:



			It is very unlikely the first vaccines will be 95% vaccines, saying that I hope they are.

There are times when rushed medicines have not been a good thing and I think you have to look at the whole picture and be very balanced and not blinded on one side. Especially as vaccinating millions and millions of people and you do not know the medium to long term effects of the vaccine.

There are good reasons why vaccines normally take a lot longer than normal medicines to come to market, as you are giving it to generally healthy people......and who at this stage we do not know truly the long term effects of the vaccines(if anyone is interested I have a couple of links saved that show all the different kinds of vaccines being developed and the technology being used on the vaccine types. Quite an interesting read and almost all of them are very clever)

You have to bear in mind that this viruses death rate is fairly low for the under 50s or even under 60s(estimates now less than 1% even some lower giving it as lower than 0.5%). So any bad vaccines could give worse results if side effects filter though. I don't care what the big chiefs say tbh, they are not truly independent and do not know the long term effects(if any), until longer term comes.

So for an example Swine Flu vaccine, there were some nasty side effects for the younger generation :-

https://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/...1n1_safety_assessing/narcolepsy_statement/en/

As clubchamp98 says its a choice we will have to make and for certain I am glad I do not have young children that I have to decide for, as they are the safest from the virus anyway. Think it is an easy choice for the much older 70-80+ year olds who have underlying conditions tho.

This is why I was interested in the poll results, as the whole is far from clear for many and why I am probably in the camp of wait and see for a while, which I will be anyway as the vaccine will not be there for me initially as they are more deserving pressing cases/people.
		
Click to expand...


There is a lot to disagree with there. The development of these vaccines has been fast, but 'rushed' implies that corners have been cut and safety compromised. You need to explain how that is the case. 

Vaccines normally take a long time because we have a long time, and each step is sequential with plenty of thinking time, manufacturing slots reserved for a future time and so on. In this case some of those steps have been done in parallel rather than sequentially, and much of the dead time has been cut out. Companies have shared IP and worked with academic institutions and regulators in a different way. 

The death rate may be low, but the death rate does not tell the whole story, there is growing evidence of long term multiorgan morbidity, and a stay in ICU with a tube down your throat is something you might want to avoid. 

Swine flu is an entirely different virus and a very different type of vaccine was developed. If you read that link, you will see that the vaccine-associated risk of narcolepsy with the vaccine was 3 per 100,000, and the side effect was considered to be due to an immunological adjuvant in the vaccine which is only used when an inactivated virus is used as the basis for the vaccine. That is not the case with Covid vaccines. Each of these stories, from thalidomide to the swine flu vaccine provide important science which informs future development and improves understanding about how to develop future candidates.


----------



## DRW (Oct 28, 2020)

Ethan said:



			There is a lot to disagree with there. The development of these vaccines has been fast, but 'rushed' implies that corners have been cut and safety compromised. You need to explain how that is the case.

Vaccines normally take a long time because we have a long time, and each step is sequential with plenty of thinking time, manufacturing slots reserved for a future time and so on. In this case some of those steps have been done in parallel rather than sequentially, and much of the dead time has been cut out. Companies have shared IP and worked with academic institutions and regulators in a different way.

The death rate may be low, but the death rate does not tell the whole story, there is growing evidence of long term multiorgan morbidity, and a stay in ICU with a tube down your throat is something you might want to avoid.

Swine flu is an entirely different virus and a very different type of vaccine was developed. If you read that link, you will see that the vaccine-associated risk of narcolepsy with the vaccine was 3 per 100,000, and the side effect was considered to be due to an immunological adjuvant in the vaccine which is only used when an inactivated virus is used as the basis for the vaccine. That is not the case with Covid vaccines. Each of these stories, from thalidomide to the swine flu vaccine provide important science which informs future development and improves understanding about how to develop future candidates.
		
Click to expand...

I don't take well to 'a stay in ICU with a tube down *YOUR* throat' as polite or even necessary and it is very pointed.

I therefore leave you to your posting style which is far from polite or nice or necessary, as many people have pointed out to you before is very aggressive, but you see no problem with.


----------



## Ethan (Oct 28, 2020)

DRW said:



			I don't take well to 'a stay in ICU with a tube down *YOUR* throat' as polite or even necessary and it is very pointed.

I therefore leave you to your posting style which is far from polite or nice or necessary, as many people have pointed out to you before is very aggressive, but you see no problem with.
		
Click to expand...

Oh, get over yourself. 

Your posting style is you post false, misleading information which might discourage people from getting a vaccine, this endangering their health. 

My style is that I robustly call you on it.

I am happy with my style in that circumstance, thanks. If you post inflammatory content, you should expect robust responses. You are right, though. You WOULDN'T take well to an ICU stay, nor would I, but someone needs to wake you up that there is more to Covid than deaths. I will consider that box now well and truly ticked.  

It is typical of the exposed waffler to pick one line they disagree with and use that as a pretext to throw all their toys out and thereby avoid mentioning anything else. I will therefore assume you have no other coherent argument to offer. Try to stop fear mongering and misinformation, in the interests of public health.


----------



## drdel (Oct 28, 2020)

Is it possible to have a thread òn a COVID topic that doesn't end up as just bickering?


----------



## DRW (Oct 28, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Oh, get over yourself.

Your posting style is you post false, misleading information which might discourage people from getting a vaccine, this endangering their health.

My style is that I robustly call you on it.

I am happy with my style in that circumstance, thanks. If you post inflammatory content, you should expect robust responses. You are right, though. You WOULDN'T take well to an ICU stay, nor would I, but someone needs to wake you up that there is more to Covid than deaths. I will consider that box now well and truly ticked.

It is typical of the exposed waffler to pick one line they disagree with and use that as a pretext to throw all their toys out and thereby avoid mentioning anything else. I will therefore assume you have no other coherent argument to offer. Try to stop fear mongering and misinformation, in the interests of public health.
		
Click to expand...

Aggressive again.

The post I made was not false or misleading. The post I made just in case you missed it is my thoughts and some facts. Thats what forums normally are.

I know about post viral symptoms as we have discussed before, they are not new and some virus have nasty post stuff for sure. I never even mentioned post viral stuff in my post, but yeah its part of the big picture and is something I take into account when considering the vaccines.

You replied with some valid points (you can dismiss certain vaccines for instance but there are plenty of other examples of medical errors. You miss the big picture with regards to new medicines and that is, medical errors happen and people live with those errors.).

I do not consider you the oracle or my lecturer on all things medical and happy doing my own research and that isn't rammed down my throat.

Thankfully in life I can choose who I talk to or not and will be my last post to you but wish you well.


----------



## Rooter (Oct 28, 2020)

BTT, as an original shielder due to other health conditions, I would welcome a vaccine, but I wouldn't be taking it without the clearance from my specialist consultant after further testing of it on people like me. (I would be happy to be a guinea pig, but no one wants me!!)


----------



## Kellfire (Oct 28, 2020)

DRW said:



			I don't take well to 'a stay in ICU with a tube down *YOUR* throat' as polite or even necessary and it is very pointed.

I therefore leave you to your posting style which is far from polite or nice or necessary, as many people have pointed out to you before is very aggressive, but you see no problem with.
		
Click to expand...

Haha. Well done on the extraordinary leap that would take that to mean that Ethan hopes you have to suffer the trauma of being intubated.

You could rival the best pole vaulters without a pole with that one.

As Ethan has said, you take personal offence at having your inaccuracies called out. Why not thank him for his expertise on the matter and giving you a succinct explanation? Nah, play the man and not the ball.


----------



## bobmac (Oct 28, 2020)

drdel said:



			Is it possible to have a thread òn a COVID topic that doesn't end up as just bickering?
		
Click to expand...

It seems not


----------



## DRW (Oct 28, 2020)

drdel said:



			Is it possible to have a thread òn a COVID topic that doesn't end up as just bickering?
		
Click to expand...




bobmac said:



			It seems not  

Click to expand...

I thought the thread was quite interesting, hearing the different points of view of people and hopefully a positive matter to happen fairly shortly.

Sorry about my part in the bickering


----------



## Billysboots (Oct 28, 2020)

clubchamp98 said:



			Dosnt say it’s safe either!
It’s bound to have a bad effect on some people , law of averages.
It’s a choice we will have to make.
		
Click to expand...

I still remain confident that our own scientists are not going to release a vaccine unless they are sure it is safe.

I know nothing about the science behind this, but do understand the concern out there that this is all happening too quickly. I am sure Ethan will correct me if I’m wrong, but the development of a coronavirus vaccine, by my understanding, is merely an extension of work which has been ongoing for years.

We are, of course, free to make a choice as to whether we all have the vaccine or not. Whatever the choice of everyone here, I wish you all well. It’s a choice I’m sure we’d all rather not have to make.


----------



## DRW (Oct 28, 2020)

Some stuff about vaccines and development here :-


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1310372301314101250

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1310372301314101250
Made alot of individual posts in the above about why the process has been quicker and about the different vaccines types, if anyone is interested.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Oct 28, 2020)

bobmac said:



			Going from ''It might not work for everyone'' to ''It’s bound to have a bad effect on some people'' is a bit of a leap.
		
Click to expand...

Why .? people have lots of allergies.
It’s not going to be a magic bullet for everyone
There will be people who have a bad reaction to this , there aren’t many drugs every human can take without somebody having a reaction, it might be mild it might not.
But I am sure it’s as safe as they can make it given the time scale they are working by.
That’s why we will have a choice.


----------



## Ethan (Oct 28, 2020)

DRW said:



			Aggressive again.

The post I made was not false or misleading. The post I made just in case you missed it is my thoughts and some facts. Thats what forums normally are.

I know about post viral symptoms as we have discussed before, they are not new and some virus have nasty post stuff for sure. I never even mentioned post viral stuff in my post, but yeah its part of the big picture and is something I take into account when considering the vaccines.

You replied with some valid points (you can dismiss certain vaccines for instance but there are plenty of other examples of medical errors. *You miss the big picture with regards to new medicines and that is, medical errors happen and people live with those errors*.).

*I do not consider you the oracle or my lecturer on all things medical and happy doing my own research* and that isn't rammed down my throat.

Thankfully in life I can choose who I talk to or not and will be my last post to you but wish you well.
		
Click to expand...

I don't either, but looking up stuff on the internet is not research. 

Adverse events of medicines are not medical errors. I have plenty of experience dealing with them, thanks. 

The effect of your post could be to put some people off getting a vaccine based on some dodgy isolated comments. That requires comment, and if you think it was harsh, sorry.


----------



## Ethan (Oct 28, 2020)

Just so I am completely clear, I agree people should exercise individual judgement on deciding whether to take a vaccine, at all or when, but that should be based on reliable information and needs a certain amount of trust in the regulator (EMA, FDA, MHRA). They will have approved it based on a detailed examination of a huge dataset, and I would expect some degree of alignment across the Atlantic.  

I would recommend that your decision is based on your particular risk (age, co-morbidities, ethnicity, gender, etc) and considers the risk of an unpleasant illness and complications of Covid as well as the risk of death. If you are a young fit person and decide not to get it, fine and good luck. If you are a bit older, like me, better to have it in my opinion, and I will put my money where my mouth is, but still your call. Nobody will be forced into having it.


----------



## Tashyboy (Oct 28, 2020)

DRW said:



			It is very unlikely the first vaccines will be 95% vaccines, saying that I hope they are.

There are times when rushed medicines have not been a good thing and I think you have to look at the whole picture and be very balanced and not blinded on one side. Especially as vaccinating millions and millions of people and you do not know the medium to long term effects of the vaccine.

There are good reasons why vaccines normally take a lot longer than normal medicines to come to market, as you are giving it to generally healthy people......and who at this stage we do not know truly the long term effects of the vaccines(if anyone is interested I have a couple of links saved that show all the different kinds of vaccines being developed and the technology being used on the vaccine types. Quite an interesting read and almost all of them are very clever)

You have to bear in mind that this viruses death rate is fairly low for the under 50s or even under 60s(estimates now less than 1% even some lower giving it as lower than 0.5%). So any bad vaccines could give worse results if side effects filter though. I don't care what the big chiefs say tbh, they are not truly independent and do not know the long term effects(if any), until longer term comes.

So for an example Swine Flu vaccine, there were some nasty side effects for the younger generation :-

https://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/...1n1_safety_assessing/narcolepsy_statement/en/

As clubchamp98 says its a choice we will have to make and for certain I am glad I do not have young children that I have to decide for, as they are the safest from the virus anyway. Think it is an easy choice for the much older 70-80+ year olds who have underlying conditions tho.

This is why I was interested in the poll results, as the whole is far from clear for many and why I am probably in the camp of wait and see for a while, which I will be anyway as the vaccine will not be there for me initially as they are more deserving pressing cases/people.
		
Click to expand...

an excellent read,   could you pm Me those links please me man, just gone into tier 3 so Ave a a bit of time over the next 28 days.


----------



## Kellfire (Oct 28, 2020)

Tashyboy said:



			an excellent read,   could you pm Me those links please me man, just gone into tier 3 so Ave a a bit of time over the next 28 days.
		
Click to expand...

This has to be the laziest post ever! Just save the links!


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Oct 28, 2020)

The forum seems to be big on advice just recently and,  in itself  there is no problem with that.

However,  on a subject such as this I would think it rather important to consider who is offering that advice. 

Personally I would have rather more trust in the opinion of a medical professional over that of someone who surfs the Internet with no such expert background.


----------



## Jamesbrown (Oct 28, 2020)

MetalMickie said:



			The forum seems to be big on advice just recently and,  in itself  there is no problem with that.

However,  on a subject such as this I would think it rather important to consider who is offering that advice.

Personally I would have rather more trust in the opinion of a medical professional over that of someone who surfs the Internet with no such expert background.
		
Click to expand...

what medical professional? The one on the internet? Could be a podiatrist for all you know!


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Oct 28, 2020)

Jamesbrown said:



			what medical professional? The one on the internet? Could be a podiatrist for all you know!
		
Click to expand...

 I  understand that @Ethan has a relevant background. 

I have no idea who it is that you are referring to.


----------



## Jamesbrown (Oct 28, 2020)

MetalMickie said:



			I  understand that @Ethan has a relevant background.

I have no idea who it is that you are referring to.
		
Click to expand...

Ethan clearly, I’m sure he is who he says he is. But don’t put your trust in people on the internet. Do your own research. 

“Everybody lies” Dr gregory House, head of diagnostic medicine Princeton Plainsboro New Jersey


----------



## Ethan (Oct 28, 2020)

Jamesbrown said:



			Ethan clearly, I’m sure he is who he says he is. But don’t put your trust in people on the internet. Do your own research.

“Everybody lies” Dr gregory House, head of diagnostic medicine Princeton Plainsboro New Jersey
		
Click to expand...

I will assume you are not accusing me of lying via the words of a fictional character.

Everyone should do their own research, but doing so properly is more difficult than it seems.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Oct 28, 2020)

Jamesbrown said:



			Ethan clearly, I’m sure he is who he says he is. But don’t put your trust in people on the internet. Do your own research.

“Everybody lies” Dr gregory House, head of diagnostic medicine Princeton Plainsboro New Jersey
		
Click to expand...

Exactly!

I will absorb what someone like @Ethan has to say on the subject but I am afraid that I remain far less likely to take on board theories offered by those with no relevant experience. 

The latter is often the first step towards conspiracy theories etc;


----------



## clubchamp98 (Oct 28, 2020)

MetalMickie said:



			The forum seems to be big on advice just recently and,  in itself  there is no problem with that.

However,  on a subject such as this I would think it rather important to consider who is offering that advice.

Personally I would have rather more trust in the opinion of a medical professional over that of someone who surfs the Internet with no such expert background.
		
Click to expand...

My opinion of so called experts has changed a bit over the course of this year.
My own doctor is the one I will listen to when the vaccine is avaliable.


----------



## Ethan (Oct 28, 2020)

clubchamp98 said:



			My opinion of so called experts has changed a bit over the course of this year.
My own doctor is the one I will listen to when the vaccine is avaliable.
		
Click to expand...

Well, you should certainly ignore the so-called experts who told you that people have lots of allergies or that it is a major issue with side effects of, or response to, vaccines (post 61). 

Your GP will follow the instructions given by the Dept of Health/NHS about who should receive or not receive the vaccine.


----------



## Jamesbrown (Oct 28, 2020)

Ethan said:



			I will assume you are not accusing me of lying via the words of a fictional character.

Everyone should do their own research, but doing so properly is more difficult than it seems.
		
Click to expand...

I’m not accusing you of lying, I just wouldn’t be getting medical advice from Ethan the money list winner. 
Your opinion is no more valid than DRW’s on a golf forum and your authoritative tone isn’t very palatable especially not knowing your expertise. 

I do not discount what you said though and what you posted in regards to vaccines I do majorly agree with.


----------



## Ethan (Oct 28, 2020)

Jamesbrown said:



			I’m not accusing you of lying, I just wouldn’t be getting medical advice from Ethan the money list winner.
Your opinion is no more valid than DRW’s on a golf forum and your authoritative tone isn’t very palatable especially not knowing your expertise.

I do not discount what you said though and what you posted in regards to vaccines I do majorly agree with.
		
Click to expand...

Gee, thanks.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Oct 28, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Well, you should certainly ignore the so-called experts who told you that people have lots of allergies or that it is a major issue with side effects of, or response to, vaccines (post 61).

Your GP will follow the instructions given by the Dept of Health/NHS about who should receive or not receive the vaccine.
		
Click to expand...

Doc asked me if I am allergic to eggs before giving me a flu jab .
Is he wrong?


----------



## Ethan (Oct 28, 2020)

clubchamp98 said:



			Doc asked me if I am allergic to eggs before giving me a flu jab .
Is he wrong?
		
Click to expand...

Is he wrong to consider the very unlikely possibility that you might have a severe anaphylactic reaction to some element of the vaccine? No. There were a handful of severe reactions (single figures) to albumin in the flu vaccine amongst the millions vaccinated last year. It is vanishingly unlikely and should be written in large print on the front of your medical records if you have such an allergy.  

Covid vaccines are not made with albumin, so no need to ask about eggs for that. Your comment above related to possible risks with Covid vaccines. What allergic reactions were you thinking about?


----------



## Kellfire (Oct 28, 2020)

Jamesbrown said:



			I’m not accusing you of lying, I just wouldn’t be getting medical advice from Ethan the money list winner.
Your opinion is no more valid than DRW’s on a golf forum and your authoritative tone isn’t very palatable especially not knowing your expertise.

I do not discount what you said though and what you posted in regards to vaccines I do majorly agree with.
		
Click to expand...

Do you have such little faith in your own critical thinking? Astonishing.


----------



## Tashyboy (Oct 28, 2020)

This was on sky news a few hours ago. Quote “ Sky news understands”.

The UK is only buying a vaccine to protect the people most vulnerable to COVID-19 - effectively ending any hope of herd immunity in the foreseeable future, Sky News understands.

Every *vaccine* bought for the UK stockpile since the summer has been on the assumption that just 30 million people - less than half the population - will get it.


With such low coverage, the virus would continue to spread and some form of social distancing would still be needed.

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) issued advice in June that said people over 50, those with underlying health issues, and health and care workers should be given priority.

*The young and healthy should only be given the jab once further analysis has been done on the risks and benefits, the committee concluded.*

That last bit, what’s the further analysis bit, re short, medium and long term?


----------



## MC72 (Oct 28, 2020)

Ethan said:



			The logical way to prioritise is by benefit-risk, that is those who stand to benefit most compared to the incremental risk of taking the vaccine compared to not getting it. That is the basis of the JCVI prioritisation, although it is done rather crudely. There is an argument that high risk people under 65 should be prioritised before fit and well older people not in care homes or shielding, but the process is probably designed at least in part to allow bureaucrats to manage it.

I also suspect that private companies will make their own arrangements so you may well be offered a jab by your employer outside of that system well before your number comes up in the NHS process.
		
Click to expand...

Are you a doctor?


----------



## Crazyface (Oct 29, 2020)

If my doctor has the vaccine, then I will. Otherwise I'll take my chances. 
PS My mum (82) is adamant she will not be having it. She has never had the flu vaccine either. She's very healthy. Although her blood alcohol level is kept quite high. LOL


----------



## Ethan (Oct 29, 2020)

MC72 said:



			Are you a doctor?
		
Click to expand...

Yes.


----------



## DRW (Oct 29, 2020)

If you are interested(usa based):-

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/938494


----------



## Blue in Munich (Oct 29, 2020)

Tashyboy said:



			This was on sky news a few hours ago. Quote “ Sky news understands”.

The UK is only buying a vaccine to protect the people most vulnerable to COVID-19 - effectively ending any hope of herd immunity in the foreseeable future, Sky News understands.

Every *vaccine* bought for the UK stockpile since the summer has been on the assumption that just 30 million people - less than half the population - will get it.


With such low coverage, the virus would continue to spread and some form of social distancing would still be needed.

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) issued advice in June that said people over 50, those with underlying health issues, and health and care workers should be given priority.

*The young and healthy should only be given the jab once further analysis has been done on the risks and benefits, the committee concluded.*

That last bit, what’s the further analysis bit, re short, medium and long term?
		
Click to expand...

And why would they do anything else?  This is a unique situation, and given the amount of research going on, I wouldn't be surprised if breakthroughs aren't being made on a daily basis; knowledge of the virus will certainly be changing daily.  So the Government buys sufficient vaccine in the short term to protect the most vulnerable, whilst watching developments and seeing if there is a better vaccine in development/production for those not yet vaccinated, and seeing if there is an established cost benefit in vaccinating the less vulnerable.  All sounds a reasonable course of action in that light.  It also avoids sitting on a stockpile of inferior vaccines, for want of a better description.

Have Sky News actually got proof that the Government are only planning to vaccinate 30 million people?  Of course they haven't, as the line you have bolded concedes.


----------



## robinthehood (Oct 29, 2020)

MC72 said:



			Are you a doctor?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, you can tell this by where he plays his golf


----------



## Ethan (Oct 29, 2020)

Crazyface said:



			If my doctor has the vaccine, then I will. Otherwise I'll take my chances.
PS My mum (82) is adamant she will not be having it. She has never had the flu vaccine either. She's very healthy. Although her blood alcohol level is kept quite high. LOL
		
Click to expand...

Your doctor, as a frontline NHS worker, will be offered it, But the real question to make sense of your position is whether they have the same risk profile as you - age, ethnicity, weight, co-morbidities? It would be rather silly to decline if you are a middle aged man with Type 2 diabetes and high blood pressure who knows where all the pies went, and your GP was a slim 32 year old marathon runner. Or it may be reasonable to decline, for now, if it is the other way round.


----------



## Ethan (Oct 29, 2020)

robinthehood said:



			Yes, you tell this by where he plays his golf 

Click to expand...

There are fewer than you would think. More business types.


----------



## MC72 (Oct 29, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Yes.
		
Click to expand...

Where did you study, and what did you specialise in?


----------



## robinthehood (Oct 29, 2020)

MC72 said:



			Where did you study, and what did you specialise in?
		
Click to expand...

Are you Jeremy Paxman?


----------



## clubchamp98 (Oct 29, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Is he wrong to consider the very unlikely possibility that you might have a severe anaphylactic reaction to some element of the vaccine? No. There were a handful of severe reactions (single figures) to albumin in the flu vaccine amongst the millions vaccinated last year. It is vanishingly unlikely and should be written in large print on the front of your medical records if you have such an allergy. 

Covid vaccines are not made with albumin, so no need to ask about eggs for that. Your comment above related to possible risks with Covid vaccines. What allergic reactions were you thinking about?
		
Click to expand...

All of them .
I don’t have any except pollen.
But as we don’t know what it’s made of we can’t say.
But if it was derived from nut oil then a lot of people won’t be able to take it.
My reply you quote was a direct answer to bob Mac about a leap in the risk.


----------



## DRW (Oct 29, 2020)

Couple more links, if you click on the little circles , more details come up about what is happening and what they are :-

https://www.raps.org/news-and-articles/news-articles/2020/3/covid-19-vaccine-tracker

https://www.raps.org/news-and-articles/news-articles/2020/3/covid-19-therapeutics-tracker

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/938494

Think I got a couple of others, saved and if I find them will load up.

if anyone has any other links, always interested to read about, now the early nights are here

PS I am Not providing public health advice, this is for people who maybe interested in just reading about it, beats reading Bella or Dennis the menace mags


----------



## Ethan (Oct 29, 2020)

clubchamp98 said:



			All of them .
I don’t have any except pollen.
But as we don’t know what it’s made of we can’t say.
But if it was derived from nut oil then a lot of people won’t be able to take it.
My reply you quote was a direct answer to bob Mac about a leap in the risk.
		
Click to expand...

OK. Nut oil and pollen are not commonly used in drug development. Ingredients used in new drugs or vaccines are carefully considered during product development. Components known to generate allergic reactions are only used if there is no alternative. Flu vaccines without albumin are available, but the cost of development is higher, so the NHS does not routinely use them.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Oct 29, 2020)

Ethan said:



			OK. Nut oil and pollen are not commonly used in drug development. Ingredients used in new drugs or vaccines are carefully considered during product development. Components known to generate allergic reactions are only used if there is no alternative. Flu vaccines without albumin are available, but the cost of development is higher, so the NHS does not routinely use them.
		
Click to expand...

That’s all I was saying to Bob .
There are people who will not be able to take a vaccine.
But they should be very careful and protect themselves.


----------



## bobmac (Oct 29, 2020)

clubchamp98 said:



			But they should be very careful and protect themselves.
		
Click to expand...

If they have allergies then they're probably used to checking contents.


----------



## MC72 (Oct 29, 2020)

MC72 said:



			Where did you study, and what did you specialise in?
		
Click to expand...

Reasonable request and reasonable questions.....


----------



## Ethan (Oct 29, 2020)

MC72 said:



			Where did you study, and what did you specialise in?
		
Click to expand...

Medicine, at a UK Russell Group University. Public Health first (at a different UK Russell Group University) then Pharmaceutical Medicine (in various jobs). I have a lot of letters, but don't use all of them on my business card. 

Public Health includes disease outbreaks, epidemiology, interpreting clinical trials and pharmaceutical medicine includes developing new drugs and vaccines.

Would you like references? I am available for consulting (rates on request).


----------



## williamalex1 (Oct 29, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Medicine, at a UK Russell Group University. Public Health first (at a different UK Russell Group University) then Pharmaceutical Medicine (in various jobs). I have a lot of letters, but don't use all of them on my business card.

Public Health includes disease outbreaks, epidemiology, interpreting clinical trials and pharmaceutical medicine includes developing new drugs and vaccines.

Would you like references? I am available for consulting (rates on request).
		
Click to expand...

Bet you'd do his Prostate test free,


----------



## Ethan (Oct 29, 2020)

williamalex1 said:



			Bet you'd do his Prostate test free, 

Click to expand...

That sounds a little homophobic. I can refer you to a psychologist where you can open up about your repressed issues in a safe place.


----------



## williamalex1 (Oct 29, 2020)

I was thinking more  the revenge aspect , but maybe I'll see you at a clinic somewhere someday .
Only joshin pal , take care


----------



## Ethan (Oct 29, 2020)

williamalex1 said:



			I was thinking more  the revenge aspect , but maybe I'll see you at a clinic somewhere someday .
Only joshin pal , take care 

Click to expand...

Fair enough.


----------



## SocketRocket (Oct 29, 2020)

Ethan and I have very different views on some subjects and have had some heated debates, However; I regard his medical posts as excellent and am always impressed with the content and expertise in them.

Regarding the vaccine, I will be prepared to have it as soon as possible as I don't like the look of the other possible outcomes or conspiracy theories.


----------



## Old Skier (Oct 29, 2020)

williamalex1 said:



			I was thinking more  the revenge aspect , but maybe I'll see you at a clinic somewhere someday .
Only joshin pal , take care 

Click to expand...

He‘s moved to the dark side


----------



## User62651 (Oct 29, 2020)

Volunteered for live trials so already had it, they gave me £100 too, only had to sign a form.
Side effects? - nothing major, just some odd cravings!


----------



## SocketRocket (Oct 29, 2020)

maxfli65 said:



			Volunteered for live trials so already had it, they gave me £100 too, only had to sign a form.
Side effects? - nothing major, just some odd cravings!

View attachment 33193

Click to expand...

No change then 🙂


----------



## DRW (Nov 4, 2020)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1324012953142743047
Doesn't sound great re the spike mutation/vaccines but to early to know, hope they stop it spreading further, poor minks.

https://nord.news/2020/11/04/radica...NRdXRLb2c3TDJhMU5HTjd4UTR4dTZNT0FxOVNmZ0JRaFc


----------



## Ethan (Nov 4, 2020)

DRW said:




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1324012953142743047
Doesn't sound great re the spike mutation/vaccines but to early to know, hope they stop it spreading further, poor minks.

https://nord.news/2020/11/04/radica...NRdXRLb2c3TDJhMU5HTjd4UTR4dTZNT0FxOVNmZ0JRaFc

Click to expand...

They better not minkey around. 

This sort of report is the new normal. There will be more and more mutations, some more infectious but less deadly, some less infectious but more deadly. Several are already in play and their differing genomes have been used to figure out where they came from. 12 patients is not many, and presumably the statement about about reduced immunity refers to lab testing of the neutralising effect of their antibodies. We know that the immune response is more complex and multi-layered than antbodies, with some people immune without ever having antibodies. I don't need we should get too worried yet.


----------



## DRW (Nov 9, 2020)

Interesting write up about the American vaccine setup etc and clearly they are looking at protecting the shipments etc from organised crime gangs 

Also would image some the low numbers in the profession that is quoted from this article is probably a reflection that some have already have had the virus but he didn't make that point but as EricTopol says much work to establish trust in vaccines as quick as possible to enhance roll outs.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-19-vaccine-distribution-60-minutes-2020-11-08/


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1325677102209757187


----------



## DRW (Nov 9, 2020)

https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/09...fective-early-data-from-large-trial-indicate/

Sounds very promising for this one (third week in November)


----------



## Ethan (Nov 9, 2020)

DRW said:



https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/09...fective-early-data-from-large-trial-indicate/

Sounds very promising for this one (third week in November)
		
Click to expand...

Very promising data indeed. It will also be interesting to see if the vaccine modified the course in those who got Covid while on the vaccine. If it did, that would be very good news indeed. These analyses are based on the number of cases of Covid that occur, and this analysis will continue, but I think we can expect to see the accelerator pedal stepped on for early approval. This is a 2 shot vaccine, with the booster given 3 weeks after the initial, so there is one organisation needed to deliver it to the numbers eligible.


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 9, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Very promising data indeed. It will also be interesting to see if the vaccine modified the course in those who got Covid while on the vaccine. If it did, that would be very good news indeed. These analyses are based on the number of cases of Covid that occur, and this analysis will continue, but I think we can expect to see the accelerator pedal stepped on for early approval. This is a 2 shot vaccine, with the booster given 3 weeks after the initial, so there is one organisation needed to deliver it to the numbers eligible.
		
Click to expand...

Best news I’ve read since the WHS confirmed that, despite my recent one shot Congu reduction, I now get one MORE shot than I did a month ago. 

Seriously, though, how refreshing to read something positive. Although how the eternally doom laden Daily Mail intend to report this without sounding negative is anybody’s guess.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Nov 9, 2020)

Billysboots said:



			Best news I’ve read since the WHS confirmed that, despite my recent one shot Congu reduction, I now get one MORE shot than I did a month ago.

Seriously, though, how refreshing to read something positive. *Although how the eternally doom laden Daily Mail intend to report this without sounding negative is anybody’s guess*.
		
Click to expand...

90% effective, what about the 10%? Who cares about them? What if you are in the 10%?

Any good? 

(agreed though, nice to see something positive)


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 9, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			90% effective, what about the 10%? Who cares about them? What if you are in the 10%?

Any good? 

(agreed though, nice to see something positive)
		
Click to expand...

Ever considered tabloid journalism as a career? You’re a natural!

🤣


----------



## Tashyboy (Nov 9, 2020)

Deffo good news re the vaccine, but to pay £670k of taxpayers brass on a pr firm promoting vaccines seems wrong.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Nov 9, 2020)

Billysboots said:



			Ever considered tabloid journalism as a career? You’re a natural!

🤣
		
Click to expand...

Ha ha. How negative and twisted would you become? To constantly look for the bad side of everything and everyone must be draining.


----------



## Ssshank (Nov 9, 2020)

Hopefully, the Mink situation will be contained as the consequences of the mutation are still unknown.


----------



## Italian outcast (Nov 9, 2020)

Tashyboy said:



			Deffo good news re the vaccine, but to pay £670k of taxpayers brass on a pr firm promoting vaccines seems wrong.
		
Click to expand...

Tash, I think its the links of the individuals involved rather than the money itself
The reality is that for any mass vaccination programme to be successful - you need to have public promotion - that applies even to covid

Safety, how many doses, how, when, why not etc are all public questions that need to be communicated to get maximum uptake

I generally agree however that the swine have really come out to feed in 2020


----------



## Italian outcast (Nov 9, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Very promising data indeed. It will also be interesting to see if the vaccine modified the course in those who got Covid while on the vaccine. If it did, that would be very good news indeed. These analyses are based on the number of cases of Covid that occur, and this analysis will continue, but I think we can expect to see the accelerator pedal stepped on for early approval. This is a 2 shot vaccine, with the booster given 3 weeks after the initial, so there is one organisation needed to deliver it to the numbers eligible.
		
Click to expand...

My only caveat is that it seems to be a short outcome duration - i think within 28 days after the 2nd dose - really we want to see 100 days + protection
I may be misreading the press data mind - will wait for a JAMA/NEJM commentary


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 9, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Ha ha. How negative and twisted would you become? To constantly look for the bad side of everything and everyone must be draining.
		
Click to expand...

Having been in my job for 29 years I can vouch for that!

Seriously, though, when all this is over, which it will be one day, I hope the inevitable inquiry into the U.K. response has the part played by the press and media right at its heart. Some of the reporting has been nothing short of reprehensible.


----------



## Ethan (Nov 9, 2020)

Italian outcast said:



			My only caveat is that it seems to be a short outcome duration - i think within 28 days after the 2nd dose - really we want to see 100 days + protection
I may be misreading the press data mind - will wait for a JAMA/NEJM commentary 

Click to expand...

Looks like the specific endpoint is 28 days, which is fine, but all patients will remain in safety follow up after that, and with rolling recruitment, some will have been in study a bit longer. Longer efficacy follow up is also planned.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Nov 9, 2020)

Billysboots said:



			Having been in my job for 29 years I can vouch for that!

Seriously, though, when all this is over, which it will be one day, I hope the inevitable inquiry into the U.K. response has the part played by the press and media right at its heart.* Some of the reporting has been nothing short of reprehensible.*

Click to expand...

Sadly not unique to just this situation but I totally agree. No doubt if there was an enquiry it would be headed by a former editor .

29 years, bet you don't have a single grey hair


----------



## Jimaroid (Nov 9, 2020)

Promising news. I thought it was worth revisiting the original poll question having learned more (thanks in part to this thread) and would like to move my answer to yes but I can't. The glaring problem I have is that I fit in the priority 11 group at the bottom of the JCVI advice, so no, I'm unlikely to have the vaccine as soon as it's available. I'm fine with that and I'll likely seek private options but as the poll can't show my intent I'll leave it as undecided.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Nov 9, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Sadly not unique to just this situation but I totally agree. No doubt if there was an enquiry it would be headed by a former editor .

29 years, bet you don't have a *single grey hair* 

Click to expand...

No, none of them will be single; they'll all have plenty of mates as I can attest.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Nov 9, 2020)

Blue in Munich said:



			No, none of them will be single; they'll all have plenty of mates as I can attest. 

Click to expand...

Take the positive, you still have hair to go grey 😁


----------



## larmen (Nov 9, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			90% effective, what about the 10%? Who cares about them? What if you are in the 10%?

Any good? 

(agreed though, nice to see something positive)
		
Click to expand...

I think 90% is past the threshold of herd immunity? Does anyone remember that number? I think it was high 60s?
it’s like any other vaccine, the ones that can get it are also protecting the ones who can’t have it. And then come the anti vaxers that ruin it.


----------



## Ethan (Nov 9, 2020)

larmen said:



			I think 90% is past the threshold of herd immunity? Does anyone remember that number? I think it was high 60s?
it’s like any other vaccine, the ones that can get it are also protecting the ones who can’t have it. And then come the anti vaxers that ruin it.
		
Click to expand...

Herd immunity is a mathematical concept. The formula is 1-1/R so for Covid, where R is 3, the threshold is 66%.

The idea is pretty simple. If each case usually gives it to 3 others, but 2 out of those 3 people (the 66%) are immune, you will typically only give it to 1 uninfected other and it doesn't multiply. If more than 66% is immune, the epidemic collapses faster.

Measles is a different case, though, with an R of 12-15, so herd immunity needs 90%+ immunity.


----------



## larmen (Nov 9, 2020)

Thanks Eathan. I watched a lot of modelling attempts back in spring but forgot the detail, and that there was a formula for it.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Nov 9, 2020)

larmen said:



			I think 90% is past the threshold of herd immunity? Does anyone remember that number? I think it was high 60s?
it’s like any other vaccine, the ones that can get it are also protecting the ones who can’t have it. And then come the anti vaxers that ruin it.
		
Click to expand...

Hopefully you saw Billyboots post before mine. My post was a jokey response.

Like your point though 👍


----------



## williamalex1 (Nov 9, 2020)

Italian outcast said:



			Tash, I think its the links of the individuals involved rather than the money itself
The reality is that for any mass vaccination programme to be successful - you need to have public promotion - that applies even to covid

Safety, how many doses, how, when, why not etc are all public questions that need to be communicated to get maximum uptake

I generally agree however that the swine have really come out to feed in 2020
		
Click to expand...

A pearls of wisdom before swine


----------



## Crazyface (Nov 9, 2020)

This "new" one from, where ever, is it ready to go or still in testing?


----------



## Ethan (Nov 9, 2020)

Crazyface said:



			This "new" one from, where ever, is it ready to go or still in testing?
		
Click to expand...

If you mean the Pfizer one, moving through testing with the regulatory review taking place in parallel, so could be approved in a few weeks. Manufacturing has been taking place for a while, so could be available for admin by end of year, but that would be for a relatively minted high risk population, and further batches to roll out across early new year. 

Other vaccs also in late development, including the Oxford Astra Zeneca one and the Moderna one. Neither too far behind, but Pfizer may have raised the bar for them.


----------



## Backache (Nov 9, 2020)

larmen said:



			I think 90% is past the threshold of herd immunity? Does anyone remember that number? I think it was high 60s?
it’s like any other vaccine, the ones that can get it are also protecting the ones who can’t have it. And then come the anti vaxers that ruin it.
		
Click to expand...

We don't know from what has been declared so far whether or not the vaccine will contribute to herd immunity. From what I can gather the 90% protection is against symptomatic covid, it is possible that people are still getting infected and spreading but not developing symptoms in which case they could actually decrease the tendency to herd immunity as they would be less likely to withdraw from social contact with infection. I hasten to add this is a possibility rather than a likelihood but as yet it is unknown.


----------



## Ethan (Nov 9, 2020)

Backache said:



			We don't know from what has been declared so far whether or not the vaccine will contribute to herd immunity. From what I can gather the 90% protection is against symptomatic covid, it is possible that people are still getting infected and spreading but not developing symptoms in which case they could actually decrease the tendency to herd immunity as they would be less likely to withdraw from social contact with infection. I hasten to add this is a possibility rather than a likelihood but as yet it is unknown.
		
Click to expand...

 

That makes no sense.


----------



## Backache (Nov 9, 2020)

Ethan said:





That makes no sense.
		
Click to expand...

If you are getting the virus and because you are vaccinated you are not developing symptoms but it is still multiplying in your upper airways and being disseminated you contribute nothing to herd immunity.
If the people without symptoms but shedding virus are more likely to be in the comunity than people with the virus and with symptoms the R rate increases and so the tendency to herd immunity decreases.


----------



## Tashyboy (Nov 9, 2020)

Italian outcast said:



			Tash, I think its the links of the individuals involved rather than the money itself
The reality is that for any mass vaccination programme to be successful - you need to have public promotion - that applies even to covid

Safety, how many doses, how, when, why not etc are all public questions that need to be communicated to get maximum uptake

I generally agree however that the swine have really come out to feed in 2020
		
Click to expand...

The bit that raised my eyebrows was where it mentioned the pr team that were employed would be doing the same work as a government department. Also odd the head of the vaccine task force Kate Bingham is expected to leave at the end of the year.


----------



## Ethan (Nov 9, 2020)

Backache said:



			If you are getting the virus and because you are vaccinated you are not developing symptoms but it is still multiplying in your upper airways and being disseminated you contribute nothing to herd immunity.
If the people without symptoms but shedding virus are more likely to be in the comunity than people with the virus and with symptoms the R rate increases and so the tendency to herd immunity decreases.
		
Click to expand...

The first part is not correct. Your contribution towards herd immunity is through being immune, whether through vaccination or symptomatic or asymptomatic infection. Then you are removed as a stepping stone for the virus.  

People shedding virus certainly contribute to the R, as they transmit infection. The cases they generate will, if they survive, contribute to herd immunity. That is basically what the fans of the Great Barrington Declaration want to see happen. The harm from transmission probably mostly happens before anyone knows they are positive, symptomatic or asymptomatic, so the time out of circulation for the symptomatic has a limited effect. General social distancing and avoiding close indoor contact with people outside your bubble/family is a critical brake on the virus.


----------



## NearHull (Nov 10, 2020)

Ethan said:



			If you mean the Pfizer one, moving through testing with the regulatory review taking place in parallel, so could be approved in a few weeks. Manufacturing has been taking place for a while, so could be available for admin by end of year, but that would be for a relatively minted high risk population, and further batches to roll out across early new year.

Other vaccs also in late development, including the Oxford Astra Zeneca one and the Moderna one. Neither too far behind, but Pfizer may have raised the bar for them.
		
Click to expand...

Your comment raising the bar got my attention.   If the next one or two vaccines declare, say 86% or 95% efficacy, do you believe that there will be a rejection of the slightly poorer performing vaccines or perhaps it will also depend on ease of deployment.


----------



## Ethan (Nov 10, 2020)

NearHull said:



			Your comment raising the bar got my attention.   If the next one or two vaccines declare, say 86% or 95% efficacy, do you believe that there will be a rejection of the slightly poorer performing vaccines or perhaps it will also depend on ease of deployment.
		
Click to expand...

86 or 95% are totally fine. These numbers always depend a bit on the population recruited and a degree of random chance, so if you repeated the trial, the number would probably change a bit. 

It is the 50 or 60% vaccine that now possibly falls into a lower category, although if it was one that could be given to some people for whom the BioNTech vacc was less well suited (certain risk factors), there would still be a place, so ease of deployment is certainly a consideration. One other piece of data that will be interesting is whether the few people who still get an infection on the vaccine get a milder course.


----------



## Tashyboy (Nov 10, 2020)

Ethan said:



			86 or 95% are totally fine. These numbers always depend a bit on the population recruited and a degree of random chance, so if you repeated the trial, the number would probably change a bit.

It is the 50 or 60% vaccine that now possibly falls into a lower category, although if it was one that could be given to some people for whom the BioNTech vacc was less well suited (certain risk factors), there would still be a place, so ease of deployment is certainly a consideration. One other piece of data that will be interesting is whether the few people who still get an infection on the vaccine get a milder course.
		
Click to expand...

Just read that the Chinese trial for there vaccine has been halted in Brazil due to a severe “ adverse” reaction. Nigh on all drugs carry a risk but at what stage is “ adverse “ reaction that would halt a trial 🤔


----------



## Ethan (Nov 10, 2020)

Tashyboy said:



			Just read that the Chinese trial for there vaccine has been halted in Brazil due to a severe “ adverse” reaction. Nigh on all drugs carry a risk but at what stage is “ adverse “ reaction that would halt a trial 🤔
		
Click to expand...

Adverse reactions occur in all trials. Sometimes they are unrelated to the study drug, sometimes they are, and if so, they can stop the trial until investigated. There was a case of transverse myelitis reported in the Oxford/AZ trial. Reading press reports, it appears that this was in a patient who had developed MS, and transverse myelitis is a common presenting feature. There was also a death, and press reports suggest that the person was on placebo, so clearly nothing to do with the vacc. There are certain adverse events that are characteristic of the mode of action of the drug, sometimes this has been suggested in lab or animal tests, for example effects on the liver, or possible interaction with other medicines. These would be very uncommon in vaccines. 

Adverse reactions are classified into mild, moderate and severe, as well as serious or non-serious. Certain levels trigger an immediate report to the regulator who can impose a halt to the trial, although the company will usually have already done that. I have worked on drugs where a halt was called for an adverse event and it lasted 6 months before an expert group decided that the event was not what it first appeared to be and was unrelated to the drug. I knew that at the start, but you have to go through the process. It nearly killed our company, though.


----------



## Backache (Nov 10, 2020)

Ethan said:



			The first part is not correct. Your contribution towards herd immunity is through being immune, whether through vaccination or symptomatic or asymptomatic infection. Then you are removed as a stepping stone for the virus. 

People shedding virus certainly contribute to the R, as they transmit infection. The cases they generate will, if they survive, contribute to herd immunity. That is basically what the fans of the Great Barrington Declaration want to see happen. The harm from transmission probably mostly happens before anyone knows they are positive, symptomatic or asymptomatic, so the time out of circulation for the symptomatic has a limited effect. General social distancing and avoiding close indoor contact with people outside your bubble/family is a critical brake on the virus.
		
Click to expand...

The immunity from vaccination may prevent disease  and or , infection or rather unlikely it may make the disease worse we don't know.
We will not know until the results are published. At his press conference yesterday :
Professor Van-Tam said that it was not yet known whether the vaccine would prevent “asymptomatic infection”, the spread of the virus in people who do not show symptoms. “Therefore we do not know if these vaccines will prevent virus shedding, and therefore have an effect on community transmission,” he said.


----------



## Ethan (Nov 10, 2020)

Backache said:



			The immunity from vaccination may prevent disease  and or , infection or rather unlikely it may make the disease worse we don't know.
We will not know until the results are published. At his press conference yesterday :
Professor Van-Tam said that it was not yet known whether the vaccine would prevent “asymptomatic infection”, the spread of the virus in people who do not show symptoms. “Therefore we do not know if these vaccines will prevent virus shedding, and therefore have an effect on community transmission,” he said.
		
Click to expand...

Yeah, I heard him. Remember, he was delivering a semi-scientific, semi-political message that had been agreed upon.

This is not a conventional vaccine. It is extremely unlikely it will make the disease worse. It may or may not prevent infection in certain sub groups, or at least the studies may lack statistical power to allow a firm conclusion to be reached yet. The question of asymptotic infection is an interesting one, although the thinking is that the vacc will inhibit viral replication and therefore shedding.

Much of what you heard yesterday was "Stick to the regulations!. We aren't there yet", all expectation management. If people now go 'OK, it'll all work out and screw these lockdown rules', Christmas will be a disaster in the NHS.

Behind the scenes, people are doing cartwheels.


----------



## Backache (Nov 10, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Yeah, I heard him. Remember, he was delivering a semi-scientific, semi-political message that had been agreed upon.

This is not a conventional vaccine. It is extremely unlikely it will make the disease worse. It may or may not prevent infection in certain sub groups, or at least the studies may lack statistical power to allow a firm conclusion to be reached yet. The question of asymptotic infection is an interesting one, although the thinking is that the vacc will inhibit viral replication and therefore shedding.

Much of what you heard yesterday was "Stick to the regulations!. We aren't there yet", all expectation management. If people now go 'OK, it'll all work out and screw these lockdown rules', Christmas will be a disaster in the NHS.

Behind the scenes, people are doing cartwheels.
		
Click to expand...

I certainly agree it looks like good news , my main point though is that we simply do not know whether or not it will prevent asymptomatic infection and therefore viral shedding. In the animal studies of the Oxford vaccine it appeared to prevent replication in the lung and lung diseases but not replication in the nasopharynx. As far as I can see in the BionNtec it looked a bit more promising but viral rna was still recovered from the nasopharynx. Both studies only looked at very small numbers of animals and how this will translate into humans is not known.


----------



## DRW (Nov 10, 2020)

Backache said:



			I certainly agree it looks like good news , my main point though is that we simply do not know whether or not it will prevent asymptomatic infection and therefore viral shedding. In the animal studies of the Oxford vaccine it appeared to prevent replication in the lung and lung diseases but not replication in the nasopharynx. As far as I can see in the BionNtec it looked a bit more promising but viral rna was still recovered from the nasopharynx. Both studies only looked at very small numbers of animals and how this will translate into humans is not known.
		
Click to expand...

I read about that on the medical studies, think I posted up the links to the medical papers at the time but there wasn't much comment , as I wondered at the time, if this was normal or not(maybe as they viral load up them massively or maybe that it doesn't always translate to humans)

Lets hope that the vaccines are successful/safe. As wherever you sit, it appears to be the only way we will open up again here and also get the NHS fully working again and protect people.

Best bit of positive news I have read since this all started last year. Roll on details of the next vaccines and when the studies are published.


----------



## banjofred (Nov 10, 2020)

As with everything else...hope for the best, plan for the worst.


----------



## Swinglowandslow (Nov 10, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Yeah, I heard him. Remember, he was delivering a semi-scientific, semi-political message that had been agreed upon.

This is not a conventional vaccine. It is extremely unlikely it will make the disease worse. It may or may not prevent infection in certain sub groups, or at least the studies may lack statistical power to allow a firm conclusion to be reached yet. The question of asymptotic infection is an interesting one, although the thinking is that the vacc will inhibit viral replication and therefore shedding.

*Much of what you heard yesterday was "Stick to the regulations!. We aren't there yet", all expectation management. If people now go 'OK, it'll all work out and screw these lockdown rules', Christmas will be a disaster in the NHS.*

Behind the scenes, people are doing cartwheels.
		
Click to expand...

 Brilliantly put.
This (correct) reasoning is an example of why sometimes the government need to be "economical with the actualite


----------



## Ethan (Nov 10, 2020)

DRW said:



			I read about that on the medical studies, think I posted up the links to the medical papers at the time but there wasn't much comment , as I wondered at the time, if this was normal or not(maybe as they viral load up them massively or maybe that it doesn't always translate to humans)

Lets hope that the vaccines are successful/safe. As wherever you sit, it appears to be the only way we will open up again here and also get the NHS fully working again and protect people.

Best bit of positive news I have read since this all started last year. Roll on details of the next vaccines and when the studies are published.
		
Click to expand...

It is an unresolved question, although I think most people in the space think that the risk of transmission must be rescued at least. In any case, I am not sure it would really change the strategy because it will still be necessary to maintain social distancing and shielding until well down the line with pretty high levels of immunisation/immunity.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 10, 2020)

Lots of words of caution about the 'Pfizer' vaccine being expressed this morning by the Health Secretary - as there was last night by the PM.  Setting expectations very much lower than otherwise might be the case and the press might set as the risk of folks relaxing now, and thinking all sorted - back to normal...

Good thing about that is that with our expectations set low they can only really be exceeded.  Which would make a change.


----------



## Tashyboy (Nov 10, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Adverse reactions occur in all trials. Sometimes they are unrelated to the study drug, sometimes they are, and if so, they can stop the trial until investigated. There was a case of transverse myelitis reported in the Oxford/AZ trial. Reading press reports, it appears that this was in a patient who had developed MS, and transverse myelitis is a common presenting feature. There was also a death, and press reports suggest that the person was on placebo, so clearly nothing to do with the vacc. There are certain adverse events that are characteristic of the mode of action of the drug, sometimes this has been suggested in lab or animal tests, for example effects on the liver, or possible interaction with other medicines. These would be very uncommon in vaccines.

Adverse reactions are classified into mild, moderate and severe, as well as serious or non-serious. Certain levels trigger an immediate report to the regulator who can impose a halt to the trial, although the company will usually have already done that. I have worked on drugs where a halt was called for an adverse event and it lasted 6 months before an expert group decided that the event was not what it first appeared to be and was unrelated to the drug. I knew that at the start, but you have to go through the process. It nearly killed our company, though.
		
Click to expand...

cheers me man. 👍


----------



## Rooter (Nov 10, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Lots of words of caution about the 'Pfizer' vaccine being expressed this morning by the Health Secretary - as there was last night by the PM.  Setting expectations very much lower than otherwise might be the case and the press might set as the risk of folks relaxing now, and thinking all sorted - back to normal...

Good thing about that is that with our expectations set low they can only really be exceeded.  Which would make a change.
		
Click to expand...

I think it was Ethan said, the gov has to deliver a cautious view of low expectations, otherwise the masses will say 'screw this lockdown and rules, we have a vaccine coming!' with no long term view on whether:

A. It will work
B. How quickly it can be rolled out
C. Will it cover everyone

Either way, it's not a short-term solution (ie next 3 months minimum) and the NHS would implode if the nation said screw it now and you could forget any chances of an Xmas resembling anything other than dinner for 2...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 10, 2020)

Rooter said:



			I think it was Ethan said, the gov has to deliver a cautious view of low expectations, otherwise the masses will say 'screw this lockdown and rules, we have a vaccine coming!' with no long term view on whether:

A. It will work
B. How quickly it can be rolled out
C. Will it cover everyone

Either way, it's not a short-term solution (ie next 3 months minimum) and the NHS would implode if the nation said screw it now and you could forget any chances of an Xmas resembling anything other than dinner for 2...
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely - and to be honest even if things turn out for the very best with this vaccine I have no idea about how long it will be from now before I have an appointment to get my first vaccination.  But if I was to guess (and I most certainly wouldn't bet very much at all on this guess) I'd be thinking 6months best - and that only as I am one of those oldies past the 6-0.


----------



## Ethan (Nov 10, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Absolutely - and to be honest even if things turn out for the very best with this vaccine I have no idea about how long it will be from now before I have an appointment to get my first vaccination.  But if I was to guess (and I most certainly wouldn't bet very much at all on this guess) I'd be thinking 6months best - and that only as I am one of those oldies past the 6-0.
		
Click to expand...

Most of us will see 2 more Masters before we get the invite.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 10, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Most of us will see 2 more Masters before we get the invite.
		
Click to expand...

So the coming one plus next one will see most of us in April-May...?  Well if Ethan thinks 6 months then maybe my guess was not too random 

Unless that's May 2022


----------



## larmen (Nov 10, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Most of us will see 2 more Masters before we get the invite.
		
Click to expand...

If Bryson wins this one no one will watch the next one ;-)

Seriously, are you talking original date for number 2 or are you hinting at a year from now?


----------



## Ethan (Nov 10, 2020)

larmen said:



			If Bryson wins this one no one will watch the next one ;-)

Seriously, are you talking original date for number 2 or are you hinting at a year from now?
		
Click to expand...

I mean Easter or after, but it will take time to roll out.


----------



## banjofred (Nov 10, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Absolutely - and to be honest even if things turn out for the very best with this vaccine I have no idea about how long it will be from now before I have an appointment to get my first vaccination.  But if I was to guess (and I most certainly wouldn't bet very much at all on this guess) I'd be thinking 6months best - *and that only as I am one of those oldies past the 6-0*.
		
Click to expand...

Good.....I might get something for being older.


----------



## Bigfoot (Nov 10, 2020)

It's good to hear that there is a vaccine but I see the biggest problem with it is that needs be stored below -80 deg C. 

Is that for the original vaccine before knocking down into doses?

So, how quickly does it degrade or lose efficiency above that temperature?
They will need liquid nitrogen or similar to allow storage and that means specialist engineering.
How will it be delivered?


----------



## clubchamp98 (Nov 10, 2020)

Bigfoot said:



			It's good to hear that there is a vaccine but I see the biggest problem with it is that needs be stored below -80 deg C.

Is that for the original vaccine before knocking down into doses?

So, how quickly does it degrade or lose efficiency above that temperature?
They will need liquid nitrogen or similar to allow storage and that means specialist engineering.
How will it be delivered?
		
Click to expand...

Was thinking this myself.
My wife takes a auto immune drug kept cold in the fridge but let’s it warm at room temp for 15 mins.
She still winces at the cold when she injects it.
You can’t put anything at -80 into your body.
They must have a delivery system.


----------



## DRW (Nov 10, 2020)

Cold chain will be overcome, they had to do it with ebola vaccines(first article discusses at a fairly easy to understand level, ) :-

https://www.wired.com/story/the-wild-logistical-ride-of-the-ebola-vaccines-high-tech-thermos/#:~:text=Point is, all signs indicate,degrees F, you barbarians).

https://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/ebola/gevit_guidance_may2016.pdf?ua=1


----------

