Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Vaccine
Comments
-
Nadou said:More data that is spotted as wrong = more ammunition for vaccine sceptics. Surely no one wants that.
0 -
To clarify. The US news report said they had been presented with old data and that was subsequently corrected. That was the balls up.1
-
Leeds_Addick said:Nadou said:More data that is spotted as wrong = more ammunition for vaccine sceptics. Surely no one wants that.0
-
Nadou said:More data that is spotted as wrong = more ammunition for vaccine sceptics. Surely no one wants that.
To use a crude example. If it was tested on 1000 people and was found to be 75% effective and then it was tested on 100 additional people and found to be 72% effective the latest picture presented would be that on the 1100 people the effectiveness is roughly 74%. Doesn't mean the initial data was wrong but that with further testing the overall picture including that initial data has changed marginally.Rob said:cantersaddick said:Nadou said:Leroy Ambrose said:Nadou said:clive said:AstraZeneca has updated the efficacy result of its coronavirus vaccine trial in the US, after health officials insisted they wanted to include the latest information.
The Anglo-Swedish firm has now adjusted the efficacy rate of its vaccine from 79% to 76%.
Further data from the US trial showed efficacy among the over 65s rose from 80% to 85%.
More testing = More information = updated headline figure = more usage = more information = updated headline figure. And repeat.Rob said:To clarify. The US news report said they had been presented with old data and that was subsequently corrected. That was the balls up.6 -
@cantersaddick "It just didnt include some of the latest testing". You say potayto, I say potarto.0
-
Nadou said:@cantersaddick "It just didnt include some of the latest testing". You say potayto, I say potarto.
It was no balls up and no deliberate intent to mislead. Just the picture is rapidly changing.
This is why there are so many numbers out there, because each time they submit to a medical agency (which is regularly - The MHRA are still receiving daily updates including weekends and bank holidays) they have to use the latest position. That position is changing all the time.5 -
The fault was with AstraZeneca. They reported outdated information from their trials in the US. The US told them about this and they corrected it.2
-
Why LOL that?! The news article wasn’t downplaying the effectiveness of the AstraZeneca vaccine but it did say this wasn’t helping the company’s stock as it was already facing scepticism in Europe. The US were hoping for a quick approval of the vaccine to add a 4th vaccine to their rollout but the outdated information is slowing the process. That was the crux of the report.2
-
There's a lot wrong with some of the stuff that's been thrown around in yhe past few hours. What it boils down to is - once again - some peoples' inability to distinguish between BAD SCIENCE and BAD JOURNALISM, and a lack of understanding of what the scientific method actually *is*.
This is, again, because people think that science 'solves' things. It doesn't - it continually evaluates and re-evaluates based on data. As the dataset gets larger, statistics become firmer, a conclusion becomes more empirical and - eventually - a consensus is formed. Its this childish modern need for instant gratification on all things that doesn't enable people to see beyond IT'S A CURE! or SCIENCE HAS FAILED US! - and the media is, as usual, almost entirely to blame for it.
I say potato, you say... Well, whatever the hell you want to say, because you don't understand that science doesn't care what I say, what you say or what anyone else says.
There's an excellent book about this subject called 'The Geek Manifesto'. It's worth a read.12 -
Rob said:Why LOL that?! The news article wasn’t downplaying the effectiveness of the AstraZeneca vaccine but it did say this wasn’t helping the company’s stock as it was already facing scepticism in Europe. The US were hoping for a quick approval of the vaccine to add a 4th vaccine to their rollout but the outdated information is slowing the process. That was the crux of the report.
I agree there is confusion and the confusion hasn't helped vaccine take-up but to attribute any of that confusion to AZ and suggest that they should just report one number and stick to it even as they get more data is complete lunacy. Imagine the outcry if they didn't update all the medical agencies with new data. They don't control how it gets reported on.6 - Sponsored links:
-
You do have to question though why the AZ numbers are changing. For example both Pfizer and Moderna have basically stuck with their same figures since their trials. Essentially 94/95% efficacy. Why the movement from AstraZeneca. I think that is what is bringing in the scepticism.4
-
Rob said:You do have to question though why the AZ numbers are changing. For example both Pfizer and Moderna have basically stuck with their same figures since their trials. Essentially 94/95% efficacy. Why the movement from AstraZeneca. I think that is what is bringing in the scepticism.1
-
Booked my second jab today, booked in for April 8th.6
-
Got my second jab tomorrow6
-
Anyone think we’re going to need a booster jab in the Autumn or Winter time , to cove any new variants that may arise?0
-
Mendonca In Asdas said:Anyone think we’re going to need a booster jab in the Autumn or Winter time , to cove any new variants that may arise?1
-
First jab yesterday afternoon at The Valley, excitingly - very strange having it done in Crossbars and then leaving as if I'd just been to a match. Got the text in the morning, in and out with no fuss. And got my sticker.
Squeezed it in just before work, felt a bit dozy after but managed to get a shift done.
Overnight and today the side effects have hit me like a train - like the aftermath of a flu jab but 10 times stronger. Was really rough this afternoon but slowly feeling better this evening.
Better than being on a ventilator. Roll on jab 2....17 -
Mendonca In Asdas said:Anyone think we’re going to need a booster jab in the Autumn or Winter time , to cove any new variants that may arise?0
-
Rob said:You do have to question though why the AZ numbers are changing. For example both Pfizer and Moderna have basically stuck with their same figures since their trials. Essentially 94/95% efficacy. Why the movement from AstraZeneca. I think that is what is bringing in the scepticism.8
-
following my jab yesterday morning, I couldn’t even get out of bed this morning to take the kids nursery. Proper flu like aches where even the tips of your fingers ache. It started last nite but worse much worse today. Took paracetamol and lots of water and gradually felt better. Feel absolutely fine now! No pain in my arm either which seems the most common side effect.4
- Sponsored links:
-
My sis (50) had hers on Monday morning and felt awful in the evening. High temp, shivery and achey. Was fine by the morning.2
-
Any lifers had their second Astrazeneca jab yet? Just interested if there were any side effects? Thanks0
-
IMPORTANT !!!If anyone had an appointment in April for their 2nd PFizer jab at the followingAlexandra Suite, Swanley (10,11,13,14,16,17th)Dartford FC (9,10,13,14,16,17th)Fleet Health Campus (2,3,4,5,7,8th)and hasn't been contacted (like me !), check https://www.facebook.com/DgshealthGPfed/ for how to make a new date.
1 -
peterreeves said:Any lifers had their second Astrazeneca jab yet? Just interested if there were any side effects? Thanks1
-
cafcdave123 said:peterreeves said:Any lifers had their second Astrazeneca jab yet? Just interested if there were any side effects? Thanks1
-
Leroy Ambrose said:There's a lot wrong with some of the stuff that's been thrown around in yhe past few hours. What it boils down to is - once again - some peoples' inability to distinguish between BAD SCIENCE and BAD JOURNALISM, and a lack of understanding of what the scientific method actually *is*.
This is, again, because people think that science 'solves' things. It doesn't - it continually evaluates and re-evaluates based on data. As the dataset gets larger, statistics become firmer, a conclusion becomes more empirical and - eventually - a consensus is formed. Its this childish modern need for instant gratification on all things that doesn't enable people to see beyond IT'S A CURE! or SCIENCE HAS FAILED US! - and the media is, as usual, almost entirely to blame for it.
I say potato, you say... Well, whatever the hell you want to say, because you don't understand that science doesn't care what I say, what you say or what anyone else says.
There's an excellent book about this subject called 'The Geek Manifesto'. It's worth a read.1 -
Nadou said:Leroy Ambrose said:There's a lot wrong with some of the stuff that's been thrown around in yhe past few hours. What it boils down to is - once again - some peoples' inability to distinguish between BAD SCIENCE and BAD JOURNALISM, and a lack of understanding of what the scientific method actually *is*.
This is, again, because people think that science 'solves' things. It doesn't - it continually evaluates and re-evaluates based on data. As the dataset gets larger, statistics become firmer, a conclusion becomes more empirical and - eventually - a consensus is formed. Its this childish modern need for instant gratification on all things that doesn't enable people to see beyond IT'S A CURE! or SCIENCE HAS FAILED US! - and the media is, as usual, almost entirely to blame for it.
I say potato, you say... Well, whatever the hell you want to say, because you don't understand that science doesn't care what I say, what you say or what anyone else says.
There's an excellent book about this subject called 'The Geek Manifesto'. It's worth a read.
You can't just claim I'm a 'pompous git' by explaining something to you FFS 🤣
It's the same as sulking when someone explains why you're wrong about something, and then resorting to abuse, rather than continuing to argue your point. Take a look back through the thread - it isn't just me telling you this...4 -
2nd Pfizer jab today. No side effects as yet. My wife had 1st AZ jab 2 weeks ago, couldn’t get out of bed for four days and still has chest and lung pain side effects0
-
InspectorSands said:First jab yesterday afternoon at The Valley, excitingly - very strange having it done in Crossbars and then leaving as if I'd just been to a match. Got the text in the morning, in and out with no fuss. And got my sticker.
Squeezed it in just before work, felt a bit dozy after but managed to get a shift done.
Overnight and today the side effects have hit me like a train - like the aftermath of a flu jab but 10 times stronger. Was really rough this afternoon but slowly feeling better this evening.
Better than being on a ventilator. Roll on jab 2....2 -
ShootersHillGuru said:Rob said:You do have to question though why the AZ numbers are changing. For example both Pfizer and Moderna have basically stuck with their same figures since their trials. Essentially 94/95% efficacy. Why the movement from AstraZeneca. I think that is what is bringing in the scepticism.Incidentally, my opinion is that the AZ vaccination is more than adequate but there seems to be a common theme of scepticism both in Europe and now in the US. I wonder why that is!So I’ve had a Lol and a Ffs today from 2 people who obviously know a lot more about this than me so I’m going to leave it at that.3