Coronavirus

[jeremyp]

Fauci has expressed some doubts about the rushed approval in the UK....though he apologized later....

The Moderna vaccine offers immunity for at least 3 months I understand...!  But that is pathetic! Do people have to get a shot after every three months? 

I think you should carefully check out the meaning of "at least".

In this case, all it means is that, so far, after three months, nobody has lost their immunity. They couldn't have had time to find out if it lasts longer yet.

What are the long term dangers of the mRNA technology? Can anyone guess knowledgeably?   Are the old methods (weakened viruses) used by the other vaccines possibly more reliable, do you think?

My guess (which is not knowledgeable) is that vaccines based on weakened viruses are potential more dangerous than mRNA vaccines. In the early days of developing a polio vaccine there were a couple of attempts that went wrong because the weakened virus was not as weak as had been thought.

[Sriram]

But that is because the vaccine has only been being tested for a matter of months so all this means is that the volunteers vaccinated a few months ago are still showing immunity at three months because that is as far as we've been able to test so far.
mRNA is likely to be safer, if anything, as it is more targeted. Regarding reliability - I see no reason why the mRNA vaccines should be less reliable, arguable more so as the basic principle is that the body uses the mRNA to produce the spike protein which then elicits an immune response. So it may provide a stronger and longer immune response to more traditional vaccines that might just inoculate with the spike protein itself which would potentially last for less time in an effective form compared to a situation where the body produces the spike protein for an extended period of time.

I am not a biologist.....but is there a possibility that the spike protein that is produced in the body will, after some time, no longer be treated as a threat by the immune system which will therefore stop producing anti bodies.  Something like second and third generation immigrants are no longer treated as foreigners. 

Sorry but.... just a thought...

[SteveH]

Why the vaccine is safe and effective, and why we should all get vaccinated, by an expert.

[ProfessorDavey]

I am not a biologist.....

Well I am.

but is there a possibility that the spike protein that is produced in the body will, after some time, no longer be treated as a threat by the immune system which will therefore stop producing anti bodies.

Not really - it is unlikely that the body will come to treat the spike protein as 'self' and fail to produce an immune response, because that isn't how the immune system functions.

More likely the immune system 'forgets' that it has been challenged with the 'foreign' spike protein previously and is no longer primed to respond to an infection. If that were to happen people who had been vaccinated would lose immunity over time and would therefore become susceptible to develop disease and be infectious to others if they are infested with the virus.

And that is why researchers will be carefully assessing how long immunity lasts following vaccination and will, if necessary, recommend booster inoculations from time to time to maintain immunity.

[Sriram]

Well I am.
Not really - it is unlikely that the body will come to treat the spike protein as 'self' and fail to produce an immune response, because that isn't how the immune system functions.

More likely the immune system 'forgets' that it has been challenged with the 'foreign' spike protein previously and is no longer primed to respond to an infection. If that were to happen people who had been vaccinated would lose immunity over time and would therefore become susceptible to develop disease and be infectious to others if they are infested with the virus.

And that is why researchers will be carefully assessing how long immunity lasts following vaccination and will, if necessary, recommend booster inoculations from time to time to maintain immunity.

Thanks...

[Nearly Sane]

Marina Hyde



https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/04/idiot-vaccine-triumph-vindication-brexit?__twitter_impression=true

[Nearly Sane]

Socially non distancing


https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/police-step-in-as-huge-crowds-gather-in-london-and-nottingham/

[jeremyp]

Socially non distancing

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/police-step-in-as-huge-crowds-gather-in-london-and-nottingham/

It's quite simple isn't it? You obey the rules: COVID 19 decreases and you can have your pubs and restaurants and music concerts. You don't obey the rules, COVID 19 increases and these things are taken away from you. It's depressing how many people are so incredibly stupid.

[Nearly Sane]

I am not allowed to travel to Edinburgh...


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55215611

[Aruntraveller]

I am not allowed to travel to Edinburgh...


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55215611

Need to get yourself a personal train. Problem solved.

[jeremyp]

I am not allowed to travel to Edinburgh...


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55215611

Fortunately, I don't think key workers would be that interested in seeing you, so you don't need to.

[Nearly Sane]

Fortunately, I don't think key workers would be that interested in seeing you, so you don't need to.

Kate and William don't need to either.

[ProfessorDavey]

I am not allowed to travel to Edinburgh...


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55215611

Hmm - could be a public relations disaster. Not sure many people will be too impressed that a 'royal train' (at tax-payers expense) still exists in this day and age, and particularly with the current pressures on public finances.

If these royals want to appear to be in touch with normal people why not ask them to travel on an ordinary train, no issue with them traveling first class but what on earth can be the justification for having their own train.

Bit like a couple of months ago when they were in a care home chatting to residents and one of the resident's children was interviewed saying that he hadn't been allowed to visit his mother for months.

[Gordon]

Hmm - could be a public relations disaster. Not sure many people will be too impressed that a 'royal train' (at tax-payers expense) still exists in this day and age, and particularly with the current pressures on public finances.

If these royals want to appear to be in touch with normal people why not ask them to travel on an ordinary train, no issue with them traveling first class but what on earth can be the justification for having their own train.

Bit like a couple of months ago when they were in a care home chatting to residents and one of the resident's children was interviewed saying that he hadn't been allowed to visit his mother for months.

From what I've read this nonsense is intended as a 'thank you', and no doubt a few forelock-tugging sycophants will be wheeled out to say how grateful they were.

Perhaps this pair of hangers-on should have decided to stay where there were, like the rest of us have to, and maybe suggest that the key workers they wished to thank might be better compensated with something extra in their pay. 

[ProfessorDavey]

Perhaps this pair of hangers-on should have decided to stay where there were, like the rest of us have to, and maybe suggest that the key workers they wished to thank might be better compensated with something extra in their pay.

Indeed, and in the spirit of the times why didn't they arrange to thanks a much wider group of people via a Zoom call, in the manner that the rest of us are doing. I think getting out their hugely expensive train is particularly ill-advised.

[Robbie]

They have done zoom calls. At this time a lot of people will appreciate them making an effort to go around and speak to people in person. It's a three day trip apparently and all the travelling, apart from cars to and from station, will be on the one train. I get that many think they are a waste of space but not all feel like that. This pair are quite popular and put others at ease. If their visits give people a boost it can't be all bad - if they weren't welcome they wouldn't be doing it.

[ProfessorDavey]

They have done zoom calls. At this time a lot of people will appreciate them making an effort to go around and speak to people in person. It's a three day trip apparently and all the travelling, apart from cars to and from station, will be on the one train. I get that many think they are a waste of space but not all feel like that. This pair are quite popular and put others at ease. If their visits give people a boost it can't be all bad - if they weren't welcome they wouldn't be doing it.

For the tiny number of people who will actually see them there might get a boost (although I suspect the vaccine will give them infinitely more of a boost), of course, millions of other key workers who wont see them. I'm sorry Robbie there are countless people who have been working their buts off, whether in key roles or to try and keep companies afloat who will not be given a boost by a couple of out of touch privileged elites telling a few nurses and school teachers 'what a fabulous job you do' (so pleased we don't need to use the NHS or state schools!!).

But beyond this the issue of the royal train surely is a PR disaster - if they wanted to travel by train rather than by car or plane (for environmental reasons) guess what - there are scheduled rail services. Apart from the cost (the last time the train was used each journey cost over £60k), it smacks of the royals not wanting to risk traveling on public transport - something that no doubt many of the key workers they want to praise have to do every single day.

I think we are tiring of the carefully stage-managed, sycophantic 'meet the people' royal engagements that are anything but an opportunity to really meet the people.

[ProfessorDavey]

It's a three day trip apparently and all the travelling, apart from cars to and from station, will be on the one train.

Well it really must be a PR disaster if the uber-sychophantic Daily Express is gunning for them for using the royal train.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1369263/royal-train-cost-royal-news-kate-middelton-prince-william-royal-tour-queen-news

[Walt Zingmatilder]

It's quite simple isn't it? You obey the rules: COVID 19 decreases and you can have your pubs and restaurants and music concerts. You don't obey the rules, COVID 19 increases and these things are taken away from you. It's depressing how many people are so incredibly stupid.

It’s certainly not conducive to the Humanist formulation of the inherent goodness of people.

[Sriram]

The covid vaccinations have begun....

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/british-grandma-is-1st-in-world-to-get-pfizer-vaccine-outside-trial-2335689?pfrom=home-ndtv_bigstory

Great news!

[SusanDoris]

They have done zoom calls. At this time a lot of people will appreciate them making an effort to go around and speak to people in person. It's a three day trip apparently and all the travelling, apart from cars to and from station, will be on the one train. I get that many think they are a waste of space but not all feel like that. This pair are quite popular and put others at ease. If their visits give people a boost it can't be all bad - if they weren't welcome they wouldn't be doing it.

Well said!  The Royals are a good system and that system does not need fixing!

Edited to add that I see from the intervening posts that the drag-'em-all-down anti-royialists have had a say!

[ProfessorDavey]

Well said!  The Royals are a good system and that system does not need fixing!

Edited to add that I see from the intervening posts that the drag-'em-all-down anti-royialists have had a say!

Rather that than your 'they are all perfect, no need to fix anything' attitude, which is frankly the kind of attitude that sends those in the middle ground (don't want to get rid of the Royals but they need serious reform) heading inexorably towards the republican camp.

If you cannot recognise how poor the 'optics' and PR are on this ill advised tour, then you really do need to think a bit more carefully. Even the normally uber-pro monarchy media seem pretty unanimous that it isn't a good news story for the royals - normally most of the national papers will put a photo of William and Kate on their front page at the drop of a hat, yet I don't think any of them have reported the trip on their front page. The BBC news last night chose not to mention it at all (which they would have undoubtedly done had they thought it positive). The Times covered the visit in a small article on p9 with the headline 'Cambridges given chilly reception by Sturgeon'.

And in a way - good on the media - ignoring the whole 'look, we've got a whole train' non-sense, the media seems to have better sense than to publicise a clearly non-essential trip to Scotland from England (not allowed) and into tier 3 areas in England (also not allowed) involving not just the royal couple but their whole entourage of advisers, media journalists etc etc. And when I say not allowed, that is in agreement with the government guidance that says you should avoid travel to tier 3 unless necessary - they've claimed it is for work, but even so you'd need to demonstrate that the travel was necessary for work. On what planet is it necessary to visit a school in Berwick at this point, even if you do consider it to be for work, which it rather stretching a point.

Robbie talked about giving people a boost - well, news for you Royal-lovers - I imagine the thing that has given the whole country a boost today (and in particular those key workers) is the start of the vaccination programme not a princess making a completely unnecessary trip to a school in tier 3 and getting a real reindeer there as well, because, well you know, she's a princess.

And while we are on this 'one rule for the elite, another for everyone else'. Well yesterday I found out that my neighbours' daughter had a serious accident over the weekend - she's in A&E in London - touch and go. Her parents aren't allowed to visit their daughter due to covid, yet William and Kate get to waltz into any hospital or care home they choose to visit.

Rant over.

[SusanDoris]

Rant over.

Actually, I can quite agree with quite a bit you have said and I do not of course think the royals are perfect, that would be ridiculous. They make mistakes. However, as I have said often enough, it's a system that works until someone comes up with a far better one, and with the agreement of a large majority of the people, not just a slight percentage.

[ProfessorDavey]

Actually, I can quite agree with quite a bit you have said and I do not of course think the royals are perfect, that would be ridiculous. They make mistakes.

In which case your comment that 'The Royals are a good system and that system does not need fixing!' seems rather ill-advised. If they aren't perfect then the system certainly needs change (i.e. fixing) and is arguably not a good system.

However, as I have said often enough, it's a system that works until someone comes up with a far better one, and with the agreement of a large majority of the people, not just a slight percentage.

A far better system is surely too high a bar - you just need a better system. For many people (and I fully accept it isn't a majority) any system where the head of state is chosen by the people in a democratic process is a better system, indeed a far better system, than one in which the head of state is selected by accident of birth.

[Anchorman]

From what I've read this nonsense is intended as a 'thank you', and no doubt a few forelock-tugging sycophants will be wheeled out to say how grateful they were.

Perhaps this pair of hangers-on should have decided to stay where there were, like the rest of us have to, and maybe suggest that the key workers they wished to thank might be better compensated with something extra in their pay. 

 


Wee Willie Windsor was only following tradition, Gordon - a tradition set by his dear old dad who decided, on being tested positive, way back in the mists of time (April) to high tail it up to Birkhall to isolate himself there with his flunkies - taking the virus with him, of course.