Coronavirus

[jfman]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

I would of thought the use of quotes around boosters means I’m highlighting OB usage when what should actually be meant is new vaccines.

I apologise if that wasn’t clear enough, tomorrow we can try crayons so long as you promise not to eat them. But right now I have an earnings call to be on.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

I would of thought the use of quotes around boosters means I’m highlighting OB usage when what should actually be meant is new vaccines.

I apologise if that wasn’t clear enough, tomorrow we can try crayons so long as you promise not to eat them. But right now I have an earnings call to be on.

Ok smart arse, get out a big fat crayon and point to the post where you ask OB

how long it would take to develop and approve new vaccines.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Ok smart arse, get out a big fat crayon and point to the post where you ask OB

Can you explain, in detail, the distinction? In particular the differences in regulatory processes for approval of both "boosters" and "vaccines"?

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

Can you explain, in detail, the distinction? In particular the differences in regulatory processes for approval of both "boosters" and "vaccines"?

I don’t need to. Toffeelees can answer.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

I don’t need to. Toffeelees can answer.

None then.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

None then.

I wasn’t in discussion with you and your interjection was of no relevance to me. After I have concluded my discussion with Mr Toffifee I may look at your post. Contrary to what you may think about yourself……….. not really a priority in my world.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

I wasn’t in discussion with you and your interjection was of no relevance to me. After I have concluded my discussion with Mr Toffifee I may look at your post. Contrary to what you may think about yourself……….. not really a priority in my world.

Yet here you are, almost every day. Pointless retort after pointless retort. Adding no value.

I'm still waiting for the distinction between a booster and a vaccine - which seems key to the point being made that you dove head first in to counter with seemingly little understanding of the subject matter. Although that hasn't stopped you before.

Right a few of you need to wind your necks in. If you have an issue with another member's posting then USE THE REPORT POST BUTTON. Be polite or just don't post.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

No, but then I credited you with the intelligence to understand that we’re talking about future variants. I’m sorry I won’t make that mistake again.

Now, if you can, why don’t you answer the question I asked about how long it would take to develop and approve new vaccines.

I do apologise, mrmistoffelees, I had assumed that you knew that it had taken next to no time to produce the booster for this autumn.

As I have been reading in a number of articles over several months now, it takes about six weeks to produce a vaccine to tackle a new Covid variant.

Here’s one of them.

https://www.ft.com/content/26f396c2-...7-aa6784a2abd9

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I do apologise, mrmistoffelees, I had assumed that you knew that it had taken next to no time to produce the booster for this autumn.

As I have reading a number of articles over several months now, it takes about six weeks to produce a vaccine to tackle a new Covid variant.

Here’s one of them.

https://www.ft.com/content/26f396c2-...7-aa6784a2abd9

OK let us say It took six weeks to develop the Pfizer/Moderna/Astrazeneca vaccine? that would mean it took approximately six months which is being generous. for it to be approved for use and for usage to then start ? ?

So, now, let us new variant that's more infectious than delta, has a vaccine escape from current vaccines & also resistant to existing immunity. It's a possibility that this occurs.

Just think about what that means in terms of being able to spread, infections & hospitalizations & ultimately deaths.

Like i said, we're only going to be able to play catch up against variants for the next few years and this is why we need to maintain a significant degree of caution. Unless of course you want us to return to the lockdowns of earlier this year & last year

---------- Post added at 14:45 ---------- Previous post was at 14:45 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I do apologise, mrmistoffelees, I had assumed that you knew that it had taken next to no time to produce the booster for this autumn.

As I have reading a number of articles over several months now, it takes about six weeks to produce a vaccine to tackle a new Covid variant.

Here’s one of them.

https://www.ft.com/content/26f396c2-...7-aa6784a2abd9

The booster is just supplies of an existing developed vaccine is it not ?

A booster is just another dose of vaccine. It might be a vaccine from a different manufacturer, or using a different vector, if that’s proven to prompt a better immune response to the formulation given in the original vaccination. But it is still just a dose of vaccine and is not developed or distributed in any fundamentally different way.

I believe at present with Covid the assumption is that the booster, if given, is just a third dose of whatever the patient has already had, though there is ongoing research looking at the efficacy of mixing manufacturers.

[jfman]

The time to develop a vaccine isn’t the issue - the mRNA companies say it can be days. Approval can be, to some degree, expedited. However mass production and distribution will remain a bottleneck.

The countries that are moving quickly with booster shots are just adding a third Pfizer shot, however Pfizer themselves are developing an updated vaccine for approval.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

OK let us say It took six weeks to develop the Pfizer/Moderna/Astrazeneca vaccine? that would mean it took approximately six months which is being generous. for it to be approved for use and for usage to then start ? ?

So, now, let us new variant that's more infectious than delta, has a vaccine escape from current vaccines & also resistant to existing immunity. It's a possibility that this occurs.

Just think about what that means in terms of being able to spread, infections & hospitalizations & ultimately deaths.

Like i said, we're only going to be able to play catch up against variants for the next few years and this is why we need to maintain a significant degree of caution. Unless of course you want us to return to the lockdowns of earlier this year & last year

---------- Post added at 14:45 ---------- Previous post was at 14:45 ----------



The booster is just supplies of an existing developed vaccine is it not ?

Partly, but it has been modified to tackle the variant.

As for the first part of your post, this is your imagination working overtime. Things can be fast tracked, and the South African variant was known about last year and hasn’t arrived on these shores in any great numbers yet.

You are looking for problems where there aren’t any. Solutions are now at hand.

Sorry, mate, but you are going to have to go back to normal. I’m not sure what you are worried about, whether it’s furlough being terminated, going back to the office or what, but whatever is motivating your desperate wish to keep restrictions in place, you will just have to get used to it. It is all at an end now (and hopefully, overseas travel will soon be back to near normal as well).

We’re not going back to lockdowns and all the associated crap, that’s just how it is.

Now, where was that nightclub I was thinking of going to when normality returned?

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Partly, but it has been modified to tackle the variant.

As for the first part of your post, this is your imagination working overtime. Things can be fast tracked, and the South African variant was known about last year and hasn’t arrived on these shores in any great numbers yet.

You are looking for problems where there aren’t any. Solutions are now at hand.

Sorry, mate, but you are going to have to go back to normal. I’m not sure what you are worried about, whether it’s furlough being terminated, going back to the office or what, but whatever is motivating your desperate wish to keep restrictions in place, you will just have to get used to it. It is all at an end now (and hopefully, overseas travel will soon be back to near normal as well).

We’re not going back to lockdowns and all the associated crap, that’s just how it is.

Now, where was that nightclub I was thinking of going to when normality returned?

It took nine months for us to get the first vaccines developed and into production use.

We already have a delta variant thats significantly more infectious than the original, why is it not possible that further potentially worse variants may appear? which require us to go through either the same process all over again?


There is no going back to normal, normal has changed, much like the world changed after 9/11

I've never been on furlough, I've WFH since before the pandemic hit albeit with significant international travel, which i dont mind doing. TBH the last eighteen months has very little difference to my life.



If you read my previous posts, you'll see that I've clearly stated that i have no wish for the lockdowns we've had to suffer being reintroduced. but, we must keep the option available in case needed. The wearing of masks/social distancing is a simple yet effective method of trying to control the spread of infection.

This brings us to your biggest problem when you debate OB, You're selective in what you read/consider before replying.

If you don't wish to go back and reread it then I'm more than happy to quote it for you.

Originally Posted by jfman

The time to develop a vaccine isn’t the issue - the mRNA companies say it can be days. Approval can be, to some degree, expedited. However mass production and distribution will remain a bottleneck.

The countries that are moving quickly with booster shots are just adding a third Pfizer shot, however Pfizer themselves are developing an updated vaccine for approval.

As I understand it, altering the formulation for a different genetic variant of the same virus does not then lead to the vaccine requiring the full re-trial and approval process, but simply an updated approval from the relevant authority. IN this sense approval is expedited by the vaccine’s very nature as a tweaked formula rather than a novel medicine.

But as you say, the bottleneck is production which is why we don’t already have delta-specific vaccines in use.