quote:

Originally posted by BushPeter:
Oxford one, as said, is cheaper and easier to store and transport, but seems to have more short-term side effects (headaches, local pain, fatigue, chills -that's from the phase II trial studies).
The others are more expensive, have less side effects, and seem to offer similar levels of protection (from the phase III trials).
Pfizer and Moderna both ~95%, Oxford ~90% (but there are some questions about the data, it might be the case that it's a bit lower in older age classes). For Oxford twice a full dose resulted in 62% effectiveness, while half dose then full dose resulted in 90% effectiveness (and less side effects which are always more at the first dose, which was reduced). However, they didn't plan it like that. The full-full dose was a group of nearly 9,000 people, while the half-full dose was a good 2,000. It can very well be that the FDA won't allow the Oxford vaccine on the market until they've done a full study within the US (current results are from studies in the UK, Brazil and South Africa).

What is very encouraging is that both in the Oxford and in the Moderna trial nobody who had received the vaccine needed hospitalisation. In the Moderna trial of 196 cases, 185 were in the placebo group. None of the 11 in the vaccinated group was a severe cases, while there were 30 severe cases in the placebo group.
It might end up that if you want an RNA vaccine you'll have to go to a big hospital in a city, and other vaccines which are more easily storaged are distributed rurally.

quote:

Then again,
There are not many vaccines i have not had.

quote:

that they can say a hard 70 or 90% effectiveness is more protective than

quote:

Although the first of their types,
Will be ONLY as dangerous as other medications that received approval in years past.
(although as I mentioned in another post the rapidity of deveopment
and lack of broad testing is concerning)

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
I don't trust any of them.

Not enough testing.

Results are fake.

Apparently one of them has not been tested on anyone over 55!

A friend here, who is a doctor, said these tests are like testing birth control, and giving the pills to men.

You get 100% results.

Funny thing is we had lockdown when we were getting 500 infections a day in our city.

Now we are running anything between 1000-2000 per day, but life is back to normal.

We have no lockdowns, we can go anywhere we like, malls are open, sports are open. Shops in the malls have restricted number of customers in any shop - the number is so high they never have that many anyway.

Went to a camera shop I go to regularly, they had a sign at the door say maximum number of customers 28!

I have never, ever seen that number in that shop, even during the sales.

quote:

Originally posted by Grandpasez:

quote:

that they can say a hard 70 or 90% effectiveness is more protective than

quote-vaccine has been proven more effective

THAN MASKS AND DISTANCING????


BULLSHIT. They did not run the tests by giving one test group the shots and

compare to another group with no shots, but who were properly masked and properly

social distancing, properly watching group sizes, working in properly setup work sites,

shopping in stores properly set up................

you and them drug co are a fascist quacks...

quote:

Originally posted by BushPeter:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
I don't trust any of them.

Not enough testing.

Results are fake.

Apparently one of them has not been tested on anyone over 55!

A friend here, who is a doctor, said these tests are like testing birth control, and giving the pills to men.

You get 100% results.

Funny thing is we had lockdown when we were getting 500 infections a day in our city.

Now we are running anything between 1000-2000 per day, but life is back to normal.

We have no lockdowns, we can go anywhere we like, malls are open, sports are open. Shops in the malls have restricted number of customers in any shop - the number is so high they never have that many anyway.

Went to a camera shop I go to regularly, they had a sign at the door say maximum number of customers 28!

I have never, ever seen that number in that shop, even during the sales.

What would be enough testing for you? What do you like to see from test results? Right now well over 100,000 people have been vaccinated with the different vaccines and nobody died, and none of the severe illnesses which developed (and if you follow 100,000 people for 3 months, some will get sick anyway!) could be linked to any of the vaccines.

The Oxford one had two groups, and indeed in the smaller group (of nearly 2,300 people) nobody was over 55.
But in another study the Oxford vaccine did show a good immune resonse in people over 55.
Pfizer claimed good effectiveness in elderly in the older group, ahd had 40.9% of 41,135 participants in that group, but the group consisted of people 56-85. And 56 is quite different from 70. It's not clear if how they were distributed in that wide age-class. In the study of Oxford focused on safety and immune response in elderly their age classes were 56-69, and 70 and over, with 160 people in the lower age class, and 240 in the higher age class. Again, this was focused on detecting common side effects and immune response. The immune respons was good and the side effects less than in <55.

Paper: https://www.thelancet.com/jour...(20)32466-1/fulltext

Or short press release: https://covid19vaccinetrial.co...ii-trial-publication

Many places had strict lockdowns when number of detected cases were much lower, but little testing was done then. Hospitals at that time were overflowing, now they're not. It's not that treatment has gotten that much better (it has got better), but because there is now a lot more testing. Although, I think that in your region they were very quick to mass test, Saeed?

28 max, when that's never even reached

As for 95% effectiveness, so 95% less cases. And the cases which are there, have a 10 times reduction in hospitalisations (which could be larger, but can't estimate it yet as there haven't been any hospitalisations of vaccinated people!).

Currently about 3.5% of cases in the US need to be hospitalised, and about half of those die.
Last weeks there were about 100.000 cases per day (that makes the calculations easier), and thus about 3,500 hospitalisations per day. If there is herd immunity that would be 5,000 cases a day, and ten times less than expected hospitalisations based on that. So instead of 350 hospitalisations, 35.
I'd say that's more than good enough for everybody to just act normally again! Acting without restriction will increase the number of cases, but that shouldn't be an issue either, it could be quite an increase from 35 hospitalisations a day to become a problem again.

quote:

jd and jt..

couple jealous assholes..

quote:

thinks Putin rules the world