the stinking enigma Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 (edited) Thanks for clearing that up. Edited November 23, 2020 by the stinking enigma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 (edited) . Edited November 23, 2020 by the stinking enigma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banker Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 One new case today so 12 in total not sure if it’s the cluster still & one in hospital. See Guernsey now only 1 case in total, not sure why’re their so low with more arrivals & much more testing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoTailT Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 Just now, Banker said: One new case today so 12 in total not sure if it’s the cluster still & one in hospital. See Guernsey now only 1 case in total, not sure why’re their so low with more arrivals & much more testing. Stop it Barlow. You'll be accused of being a Channel Islands obsessed border nutter otherwise. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barlow Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 4 minutes ago, NoTailT said: Stop it Barlow. You'll be accused of being a Channel Islands obsessed border nutter otherwise. ? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc.fixit Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Gladys said: Thalidomide was a tragic disaster, but that was 60 years ago and surely the ways of testing for side effects have improved vastly, as has an aversion to product risk. Had a heated exchange last night with a few friends, and it struck me that the same people who are willing to lock themselves away because of covid, are also the least likely to have an 'unproven' vaccine. Perhaps they are very risk averse, but I have a sneaking feeling that at least one has become 'institutionalised' and finds comfort in not having to face up to the world and will happily remain closeted in self-isolation indefinitely. Somewhat telling was one who said they won't have the vaccine now but will next year to enable them go on a planned holiday next March! The ways of testing may have improved but greed hasn't changed heart. Although I've just heard that at least one of the manufacturers has said that they will sell at cost until the pandemic is over.......hmmm.........might slightly re-appraise my view. Edited November 23, 2020 by doc.fixit 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yootalkin2me Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 11 hours ago, Itsmeee said: Not everybody has a garden. Very true, that's why I listed other forms of excercise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 1 hour ago, Banker said: One new case today so 12 in total not sure if it’s the cluster still & one in hospital. See Guernsey now only 1 case in total, not sure why’re their so low with more arrivals & much more testing. According to the Facebook post it's actually 10 - 1 in hospital, 9 in the community. Presumably two have recovered over the weekend. At least you would have hoped they have 'recovered', I don't know if they are being tested to see if they are Covid-free (as it happens Guernsey do) or they are still using the guesswork assessment of 14 day since the first symptom appeared. Unfortunately, especially if people also have other ailments (say a cold) and delayed in seeking a test, it may not be accurate and they might not really be free of infection because they actually caught after they thought they did. Whether we're getting more because there was a rush of people coming back before last Thursday to beat the household isolation deadline is a question. Of course giving a week's notice encouraged that and led to the possibility of (at best) more clusters. But policy seems to be decided more on what is convenient for people's mates rather than what is inconvenient for the virus. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winnie Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 2 hours ago, John Wright said: Those weren’t the figures. At all. The trial was 24,000 persons. Roughly half had the vaccine and half had a placebo. 135 got Covid 102 of those receiving the placebo got Covid. 33 of those who had the vaccine got Covid, but it was mild or asymptomatic. Those who got the vaccine were subdivided. Some got 2 full doses, some got a half dose and a full dose. There were fewer positives in the different dose sample than in the equal dose sample. 90% to 62% and an average of 70%. That's not correct. If 102 people who we're not vaccinated got covid, then you have to assume that 102 people who did receive the vaccine were exposed to covid, and of those 102 people only 33 tested positve. It's very small numbers in the sample, and i'd imagine the figures are not very accurate, but still positive enough to crack on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 During this trial were they all exposed to covid, as in deliberately? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 1 minute ago, the stinking enigma said: During this trial were they all exposed to covid, as in deliberately? No. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 So how did they ensure that all conditions were the same for everyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 11 minutes ago, winnie said: That's not correct. If 102 people who we're not vaccinated got covid, then you have to assume that 102 people who did receive the vaccine were exposed to covid, and of those 102 people only 33 tested positve. It's very small numbers in the sample, and i'd imagine the figures are not very accurate, but still positive enough to crack on. The sample size is 24,000 and my figures are correct. I went to the Oxford test report. The sample sizes are large enough, at 12,000 vaccinated and 12,000 on placebo for there to be a high degree of statistical accuracy allowing you to safely assume that absent vaccine exposure and infection rates would be broadly similar. The difference between 102 and 33 is highly statistically significant. There will also be figures from outside the trial that the testing can be compared with, like Covid infection rates in the area the trial volunteers were from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 3 minutes ago, the stinking enigma said: So how did they ensure that all conditions were the same for everyone? Sample size Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted November 23, 2020 Share Posted November 23, 2020 Forgive me again, but did I hear it correctly that the placebo was a meningitis vaccine? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.