RugbyRebels

Galfon wrote:Fur crying out loud, that's all we need..

https://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/a ... m=referral

That's really worrying.

(Pedantic aside : I think the article should have mentioned the name SARS-CoV-2 to make it clear this is a mutation of the virus which causes Covid-19, not some other coronavirus.)

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Galfon wrote:Fur crying out loud, that's all we need..

https://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/a ... m=referral

That's really worrying.

(Pedantic aside : I think the article should have mentioned the name SARS-CoV-2 to make it clear this is a mutation of the virus which causes Covid-19, not some other coronavirus.)

The odds were quite high I suppose of this or similar happening. Good to see the Danes take swift action, hopefully it’s swift enough.

I haven't done one of these for a while but since we're in the 2nd wave (back by no demand at all, let alone popular ) here it is:

New ONS numbers up to 30 Oct are out, so as of that date we have:
Positive test UK Covid-19 deaths (headline gov number): 47,104
All UK Covid-19 per death certificate (ONS number): 61,648
So the Covid-19 death certificate number is 31% higher than the government number.

Excess deaths compared with 5 year average to 30 Oct: 68,646
which is 46% higher than the government number.

Add at least 3k to these to get an estimate of current figures.

I hope the post-election euphoria doesn't lead the eyes away from the ball across t'pond. or they won't be having a ball soon..



at reportedly £30 a time for a Pfizzy pop (uk costs), it will be intreresting to see how efficient the National vaccination programme runs in US, between administrations.

So for a family of 4 it's £240 for this 1st vaccine which may or may not confer long term resistance. That's not going to be an easy sell outside Connecticut

https://theamericanonews.com/2020/11/09/pfizer-vaccine/

It should be free. Let’s see.

gransoporro wrote:https://theamericanonews.com/2020/11/09/pfizer-vaccine/

It should be free. Let’s see.

These guys you mean?



"It's wholly inappropriate for executives at pharmaceutical companies to be implementing or modifying 10b5-1 plans the business day before they announce data or results from drug trials,"



But hey, apparently they are part of a "medical deep state". Really.

These fucking guys in government...

Yes, that’s the dude.

That on the face of it is wildly inappropriate. And there's surely no way he's allowed to trade without it going past compliance so this error seems likely to go across a good number of people

http://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4425

British Medical Journal wrote:When good science is suppressed by the medical-political complex, people die

Politicians and governments are suppressing science. They do so in the public interest, they say, to accelerate availability of diagnostics and treatments. They do so to support innovation, to bring products to market at unprecedented speed. Both of these reasons are partly plausible; the greatest deceptions are founded in a grain of truth. But the underlying behaviour is troubling.

Science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. Covid-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health.1 Politicians and industry are responsible for this opportunistic embezzlement. So too are scientists and health experts. The pandemic has revealed how the medical-political complex can be manipulated in an emergency—a time when it is even more important to safeguard science.

...

The incident relates to research published this week by The BMJ, which finds that the government procured an antibody test that in real world tests falls well short of performance claims made by its manufacturers.1213 Researchers from Public Health England and collaborating institutions sensibly pushed to publish their study findings before the government committed to buying a million of these tests but were blocked by the health department and the prime minister’s office.14 Why was it important to procure this product without due scrutiny? Prior publication of research on a preprint server or a government website is compatible with The BMJ’s publication policy. As if to prove a point, Public Health England then unsuccessfully attempted to block The BMJ’s press release about the research paper.

ARTICLE CONTINUES...

If you fancy some amusement 5Live accidentally let someone who knows what they're talking about onto air last night

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000pg09

Starts 8 minutes in, bloody Indian immigrants coming over here with their science and understanding!

Which Tyler wrote:http://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4425

British Medical Journal wrote:When good science is suppressed by the medical-political complex, people die

Politicians and governments are suppressing science. They do so in the public interest, they say, to accelerate availability of diagnostics and treatments. They do so to support innovation, to bring products to market at unprecedented speed. Both of these reasons are partly plausible; the greatest deceptions are founded in a grain of truth. But the underlying behaviour is troubling.

Science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. Covid-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health.1 Politicians and industry are responsible for this opportunistic embezzlement. So too are scientists and health experts. The pandemic has revealed how the medical-political complex can be manipulated in an emergency—a time when it is even more important to safeguard science.

...

The incident relates to research published this week by The BMJ, which finds that the government procured an antibody test that in real world tests falls well short of performance claims made by its manufacturers.1213 Researchers from Public Health England and collaborating institutions sensibly pushed to publish their study findings before the government committed to buying a million of these tests but were blocked by the health department and the prime minister’s office.14 Why was it important to procure this product without due scrutiny? Prior publication of research on a preprint server or a government website is compatible with The BMJ’s publication policy. As if to prove a point, Public Health England then unsuccessfully attempted to block The BMJ’s press release about the research paper.

ARTICLE CONTINUES...

I feel this story won't feature strongly in the Telegraph.

I feel there isn't really anyone at the tiller right now....


It's all about to turn to fish paste. Again.

There are reluctant murmerings now that letting the older
children attend school may be contributing to rising cases.
Italy quickly returned to the bumpy road after their schools re-opened, after holding things well.

Meanwhile, the PM has reportedly been notified by NHS Test and Trace that he is required to self-isolate as a result of having contact with someone diagnosed with the disease..( an MP, socially distanced but no masks.. )

We have a wonderful system in place here right now...

No restaurants, no indoor sports or clubs, no kids activities, no going outside between 8pm and 5am, no meeting in groups of more than 10...

Yet...

There's still school and nursery, and you can go to church...

So the same 30 kids who meet in the morning at nursery and spend 3 hours in a room together without masks are not allowed to spend time together in the afternoon...

Unless they go to a church, which is probably poorly ventilated, and sit in a room full of old people.

Yeah, great idea that.

I just wish lockdown rules made sense.

Seriously, there are exemptions on travel bans for business. I mean, fuck right off. You can do business over this wonderful thing we have called the internet.

It just leads to people breaking them. If the rules were simply: No travel. People might adhere. As it is, everyone is pissed off.

As long as it doesn’t interfere with weekend golf. I mean, fuck, there are limits people.

One of my local golf courses is now much busier with golf cancelled. There are a couple of courses in a local park and there are now far more people out walking on the closed golf course than you'd ever see golfers, though I suspect the groups walking are far more likely to be from the same household or bubbling than the golfing groups were

Mass testing looking to be a disastrous waste of time and money (unless you are a relative or friend or donor to the Tories):

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... id-testing

Two queries, why are the vaccines showing up so well in the higher age groups, and what would be the best plan for a global rollout for vaccine deployment even if we'll actually get individual nations scrambling to address their concerns first?

Digby wrote:Two queries, why are the vaccines showing up so well in the higher age groups, and what would be the best plan for a global rollout for vaccine deployment even if we'll actually get individual nations scrambling to address their concerns first?

Wot do you mean showing up well old chap? Less of them dying?

morepork wrote:

Digby wrote:Two queries, why are the vaccines showing up so well in the higher age groups, and what would be the best plan for a global rollout for vaccine deployment even if we'll actually get individual nations scrambling to address their concerns first?

Wot do you mean showing up well old chap? Less of them dying?

I think he’s talking about the low drop off in efficiency for older patients.

It does look promising.

Digby wrote:Two queries, why are the vaccines showing up so well in the higher age groups, and what would be the best plan for a global rollout for vaccine deployment even if we'll actually get individual nations scrambling to address their concerns first?

In the UK that's the plan which makes most money for the Tories and their pals.

Stom wrote:

morepork wrote:

Digby wrote:Two queries, why are the vaccines showing up so well in the higher age groups, and what would be the best plan for a global rollout for vaccine deployment even if we'll actually get individual nations scrambling to address their concerns first?

Wot do you mean showing up well old chap? Less of them dying?

I think he’s talking about the low drop off in efficiency for older patients.

It does look promising.

It does look good, which bar more Brexit voters might survive is a good thing. Just given it's a boost to reduced immune system it's seemingly a much bigger boost than expected

I wonder how long immunity lasts, and I assume by "efficacy" they mean immunity (seropositive + undetectable viral genomes) and not simply not dead yet.

How does one get a substance that is minus 80 C into one's body without the temperature damaging your body cells? Is it as simple as warming it and using within a v small time frame?

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk