Christmas Bubble for Covid

[Toodles McGinty]

Capitalism and investment banks believed in their talent generating
the funds to develop research.

You said 'it's not a Labour achievement'. I merely mentioned it isn't a Labour or Tory achievement. Nor is it to do with Lib-Dem, SNP or Greens. It has nothing to do with politics whatsoever. At least not the politics of this country. It's about science, not politics. Can't understand why it was mentioned.

Nothing wrong with regulated capitalism. Though I thought the company was founded with investment from Thomas Strungmann, who made his money from other pharma companies.

I could be wrong. No doubt if you go back far enough an investment bank was involved. It's what they do, after all. I suppose the gift is recognising the right investment.

Good news for us that it all happened, whoever invested.

[Hamble]

[QUOTE=Toodles McGinty;6752889]

You said 'it's not a Labour achievement'. I merely mentioned it isn't a Labour or Tory achievement. Nor is it to do with Lib-Dem, SNP or Greens. It has nothing to do with politics whatsoever. At least not the politics of this country. It's about science, not politics. Can't understand why it was mentioned.

I stand by 'it's not a Labour achievement'.

The scientists may be immigrants they are foremost educated successful billionaires backed by Capitalism and American banks.

It is good that you are as ok with the above as I am.
Priorities and all that.

[Toodles McGinty]

You said 'it's not a Labour achievement'. I merely mentioned it isn't a Labour or Tory achievement. Nor is it to do with Lib-Dem, SNP or Greens. It has nothing to do with politics whatsoever. At least not the politics of this country. It's about science, not politics. Can't understand why it was mentioned.

I stand by 'it's not a Labour achievement'.

The scientists may be immigrants they are foremost educated successful billionaires backed by Capitalism and American banks.

It is good that you are as ok with the above as I am.
Priorities and all that.

You should stand by 'it's not a Labour achievement'. It isn't a Labour achievement in the slightest. I'll stand by it's not a Tory achievement either. I'll also say it isn't a Post Office achievement, it isn't a coal miners achievement, it isn't a Peppa Pig achievement, it isn't a Piers Morgan achievement, it isn't a camel achievement. The list of people or things that didn't achieve it is almost endless. It's purely science. Not politics. Just science.

I agree they are foremost educated. A feather in the cap of the German education system. And in their immigration system. I've always said, and it has been proved over and over, that immigrants bring far more to a country than they take.

They became billionaires through achievement and canny backers. I'm not sure that was an American bank, but their particular talents were nurtured by wealthy pharma companies, definitely.

Again, as I've said on many previous occasions, there is nothing wrong with regulated capitalism. Unfettered, unregulated capitalism causes problems. It ends with austerity measures placed on those who didn't cause the problems in the first place. But I've no problem with anyone making their billions, as long as they pay tax and don't steal employees pension pots. More power to them. I'm absolutely OK with that.

[seivad]

I can't believe that I'm seeing vaccine procurement being used as a means of touting the superiority of the Tory party, or as support for capitalism and investment banks.

This isn't just a UK issue. It's not a political issue either. It's a global humanitarian issue. The UK has done the same as every other rich country has done, regardless of their governing party's ideology. They have pre-ordered a selection of vaccine candidates. Where the UK differs from other countries, is that they are the first to authorize its use. The US and Canada will follow this week.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03370-6

Scientists, not politicians, will have selected the vaccine candidates to pre-order. Scientists evaluate vaccines and authorize their use, or not. Our governments are responsible for the logistical nightmare to follow, which includes ensuring we have an adequate cold chain, all of the supplies necessary to administer the vaccine, and a vaccine registry to keep track of who and what vaccine was administered the first time for the vaccines which need 2 doses. Should be fun!

I will reserve my judgement of the government when they have fulfilled the part of the operation that they are responsible for, and not a minute before.

[Toodles McGinty]

I can't believe that I'm seeing vaccine procurement being used as a means of touting the superiority of the Tory party, or as support for capitalism and investment banks.

I can.

Though I was quite surprised that the lack of mention of the vaccine on the day it was announced was then translated into 'nobody is mentioning it because it isn't a Labour achievement', or 'it isn't an opportunity to take a pop at the government'.

I don't think 99% of people on here, regardless of their political persuasion, thought about politics for a microsecond. I think the vast majority were relieved, and possibly a little concerned with the speed of which it was approved. But that's been explained.

While there are concerns about the handling of the virus in many countries, and there will be eventual inquiries investigating the morality or even legality of various government's actions, I think trying to make political capital out of a vaccine that will save millions if not billions, is distasteful at best.

I'm most concerned right now about our ability to deliver the vaccine safely and quickly. If that goes smoothly, I'll be the first to congratulate the powers that be.

[Alikado]

I can't believe that I'm seeing vaccine procurement being used as a means of touting the superiority of the Tory party, or as support for capitalism and investment banks.

This isn't just a UK issue. It's not a political issue either. It's a global humanitarian issue. The UK has done the same as every other rich country has done, regardless of their governing party's ideology. They have pre-ordered a selection of vaccine candidates. Where the UK differs from other countries, is that they are the first to authorize its use. The US and Canada will follow this week.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03370-6

Scientists, not politicians, will have selected the vaccine candidates to pre-order. Scientists evaluate vaccines and authorize their use, or not. Our governments are responsible for the logistical nightmare to follow, which includes ensuring we have an adequate cold chain, all of the supplies necessary to administer the vaccine, and a vaccine registry to keep track of who and what vaccine was administered the first time for the vaccines which need 2 doses. Should be fun!

I will reserve my judgement of the government when they have fulfilled the part of the operation that they are responsible for, and not a minute before.

I think this Pfizer vaccine will soon become a dead duck, it has no future in 'poor' countries due to the transport and storage issues. If the press reports are true and it only gives 90 days protection at £30 a jab I can't see many / any Governments funding that.
When other vaccines become available will there be implications switching between vaccines, will a 'cooling off / detoxification ' period be required?
It all points to the sensible option being (unless you are at serious risk) to wait a couple years until all the long term tests are done and the results evaluated.

[seivad]

I think this Pfizer vaccine will soon become a dead duck, it has no future in 'poor' countries due to the transport and storage issues. If the press reports are true and it only gives 90 days protection at £30 a jab I can't see many / any Governments funding that.
When other vaccines become available will there be implications switching between vaccines, will a 'cooling off / detoxification ' period be required?
It all points to the sensible option being (unless you are at serious risk) to wait a couple years until all the long term tests are done and the results evaluated.

Poor countries are also disadvantaged in that they don't stand a chance in pre-ordering vaccine candidates. Even if they had the necessary funds, us rich countries have gobbled up vaccine supplies.

I've not seen any press reports re. 90 day protection. Did they cite a reliable source? I don't care if I have to pay for it, but I would hope for protection that lasts a bit longer than that!

I'm pretty sure that with vaccines requiring 2 shots, the second shot has to be the same vaccine, 4 weeks later I think. This might cause a problem if there aren't any supplies available. They could assign 2 shots per person from their inventory at the time the first shot is administered. That way the 2nd shot would be withheld from available inventory.

At my age I really don't want to wait any longer than necessary. I would like to see independent peer reviews, along with details of the raw data. That's not going to happen anytime soon though. I will put my faith in the FDA report, which should be coming out on Dec.10. The FDA's process is far more rigorous. They examine the raw data and look for anomalies between their conclusions and the vaccine producer. I also trust Health Canada to be thorough. They are notoriously cautious, but it does slow them down.

[Toodles McGinty]

I think this Pfizer vaccine will soon become a dead duck, it has no future in 'poor' countries due to the transport and storage issues. If the press reports are true and it only gives 90 days protection at £30 a jab I can't see many / any Governments funding that.
When other vaccines become available will there be implications switching between vaccines, will a 'cooling off / detoxification ' period be required?
It all points to the sensible option being (unless you are at serious risk) to wait a couple years until all the long term tests are done and the results evaluated.

It does have it's limitations. I think we'll get a combination of the 3 main contenders eventually

I was watching Peter Openshaw and another immunologist on the news recently. The interviewer asked what would happen if you couldn't get the second dose, could you use a dose of the alternatives. She thought that missing the second dose would weaken immunity. Both experts agreed that if anything, a second dose of an alternative vaccine would possibly give you greater immunity.

I only understand the most basic principles. But it does seem to make sense. I think

I do understand folk holding off the vaccines until more is known. Especially if you aren't particularly at risk. But I don't think it's a particularly 'new' vaccine, as they've been working on Coronaviruses for decades. I think they are adaptations. I don't see my age group getting a sniff until March at least, if all goes to plan. So we should know a little more then.

[Alikado]

Poor countries are also disadvantaged in that they don't stand a chance in pre-ordering vaccine candidates. Even if they had the necessary funds, us rich countries have gobbled up vaccine supplies.

I've not seen any press reports re. 90 day protection. Did they cite a reliable source? I don't care if I have to pay for it, but I would hope for protection that lasts a bit longer than that!

I'm pretty sure that with vaccines requiring 2 shots, the second shot has to be the same vaccine, 4 weeks later I think. This might cause a problem if there aren't any supplies available. They could assign 2 shots per person from their inventory at the time the first shot is administered. That way the 2nd shot would be withheld from available inventory.

At my age I really don't want to wait any longer than necessary. I would like to see independent peer reviews, along with details of the raw data. That's not going to happen anytime soon though. I will put my faith in the FDA report, which should be coming out on Dec.10. The FDA's process is far more rigorous. They examine the raw data and look for anomalies between their conclusions and the vaccine producer. I also trust Health Canada to be thorough. They are notoriously cautious, but it does slow them down.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-...sible-12151178

[seivad]

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-...sible-12151178

Thanks! I've been having a little gambol on Google and it seems that the next candidate, the Moderna vaccine, is reckoned to provide 90 days immunity too. However Dr Tony Fauci and other experts have said that they believe that the immune system will remember the virus, and if re-exposed to it will produce new antibodies. Further studies are needed to confirm this memory response.

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/mode...-study-2333928

[Hamble]

You should stand by 'it's not a Labour achievement'. It isn't a Labour achievement in the slightest. I'll stand by it's not a Tory achievement either. I'll also say it isn't a Post Office achievement, it isn't a coal miners achievement, it isn't a Peppa Pig achievement, it isn't a Piers Morgan achievement, it isn't a camel achievement. The list of people or things that didn't achieve it is almost endless. It's purely science. Not politics. Just science.

I agree they are foremost educated. A feather in the cap of the German education system. And in their immigration system. I've always said, and it has been proved over and over, that immigrants bring far more to a country than they take.

They became billionaires through achievement and canny backers. I'm not sure that was an American bank, but their particular talents were nurtured by wealthy pharma companies, definitely.

Again, as I've said on many previous occasions, there is nothing wrong with regulated capitalism. Unfettered, unregulated capitalism causes problems. It ends with austerity measures placed on those who didn't cause the problems in the first place. But I've no problem with anyone making their billions, as long as they pay tax and don't steal employees pension pots. More power to them. I'm absolutely OK with that.

You got it.
It is not a Labour achievement.

[Hamble]

I can't believe that I'm seeing vaccine procurement being used as a means of touting the superiority of the Tory party, or as support for capitalism and investment banks.

This isn't just a UK issue. It's not a political issue either. It's a global humanitarian issue. The UK has done the same as every other rich country has done, regardless of their governing party's ideology. They have pre-ordered a selection of vaccine candidates. Where the UK differs from other countries, is that they are the first to authorize its use. The US and Canada will follow this week.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03370-6

Scientists, not politicians, will have selected the vaccine candidates to pre-order. Scientists evaluate vaccines and authorize their use, or not. Our governments are responsible for the logistical nightmare to follow, which includes ensuring we have an adequate cold chain, all of the supplies necessary to administer the vaccine, and a vaccine registry to keep track of who and what vaccine was administered the first time for the vaccines which need 2 doses. Should be fun!

I will reserve my judgement of the government when they have fulfilled the part of the operation that they are responsible for, and not a minute before.

Quote
"While other vaccine makers have pledged not to profit from their jabs during the pandemic, Pfizer has taken a different stance. Treating it as a commercial opportunity, the company turned down research funding from the US government under its vaccine programme Operation Warp Speed, and used almost $2bn of its own money instead to develop the Covid-19 vaccine with Germany’s BioNTech.

However, the Mainz-based BioNTech received €375m (£335m) from the German government and a €100m loan from the European Investment Bank. BioNTech is tiny compared to Pfizer, with revenues of €109m last year compared with Pfizer’s $52bn.

The global poverty charity Oxfam said the vaccine would be “zero per cent effective to the people who can’t access or afford it”, and urged the companies to share their vaccine with other developers.

The rival US drugmaker Johnson & Johnson, along with AstraZeneca, which is developing a coronavirus vaccine in partnership with Oxford University, have both pledged to make their vaccines available on a not-for-profit basis during this pandemic. AstraZeneca, which is charging governments $3 to $5 a dose, also said last week that low-income countries would receive its vaccine on a cost basis “in perpetuity”.

The loss-making US biotech firm Moderna, which has received nearly $1bn in research funding from the US government, has priced its vaccine at $32 to $37 a shot."



https://www.theguardian.com/business...avirus-vaccine