Coronavirus

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Those age groups make up 1/3 of the U.K. population.

What are all these extra people dying of (80k+ YTD over the 5 year average, and the number of deaths registered in the UK in the week ending 15 January 2021 was 20,019, which was 4,347 higher than the five-year average), if COVID is not contributing to the deaths?

I haven’t said COVID did or didn’t contribute to those deaths. It will have done in the vast majority of cases.

But there will be % margin of error - we just don’t know what that is.

---------- Post added at 18:13 ---------- Previous post was at 18:04 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

In what way?.

Because there are inconsistencies in gathering the data and how the data is recorded.

The 100,000 figure is what we’ve got, but that actual number may be less and it quite possibly may be more.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulat...dandwales/2020

We may never know what the real total is.

Originally Posted by Pierre

I haven’t said COVID did or didn’t contribute to those deaths. It will have done in the vast majority of cases.

But there will be % margin of error - we just don’t know what that is.

I thought you said the data was spurious? (as in the ONS data was "just as spurious").

Spurious means "false or fake"...

On a COVID related (and slightly scary) note.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....20.20215863v1

There is evidence that COVID-19 may cause long term health changes past acute symptoms, termed ‘long COVID’. Our analyses of detailed cognitive assessment and questionnaire data from tens thousands of datasets, collected in collaboration with BBC2 Horizon, align with the view that there are chronic cognitive consequences of having COVID-19. Individuals who recovered from suspected or confirmed COVID-19 perform worse on cognitive tests in multiple domains than would be expected given their detailed age and demographic profiles. This deficit scales with symptom severity and is evident amongst those without hospital treatment.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

I thought you said the data was spurious? (as in the ONS data was "just as spurious").

Spurious means "false or fake"...

Ok poor choice of words, I was more meaning inaccurate.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

As we pass 100,000 deaths.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55757378

The distribution is interesting.


99% of deaths aged 45 or over

90% of deaths aged 65 or over

75% of deaths aged 75 or over

42% of deaths aged 85 or over

30% of all deaths within Care Homes.

All the data based on the rather loose definition of dying within 28days of a positive test, regardless of any other conditions the individual may have had.

Odd that disproportionately more older people seem to have these spurious non-Covid related deaths and die within 28 days. Getting hit by a bus, etc.

It's almost as if non-Covid related deaths are a tiny, tiny, minority.

Originally Posted by jfman

It's almost as if non-Covid related deaths are a tiny, tiny, minority.

Its almost is if you are trolling, which would be bad for your future posting ability.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

From Twitter;



Ooof, that's embarrassing for some journalist!

Hopefully ex journalist, incompetence over something so serious is unforgivable

[1andrew1]

For those who like their detail, this makes an interesting read.

An exclusive interview with AstraZeneca's CEO on the accusations from Europe after the delay of Oxford vaccine supplies, some revealing details of the vaccine contracts signed by Astrazeneca with Britain and EU ("no obligations, just best effort" for the latter), why Boris Johnson's government has taken some advantage and why the one-dose strategy is the "right one"

https://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/20...nes-284349628/

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

For those who like their detail, this makes an interesting read.

https://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/20...nes-284349628/

That is a first class article. Great when you get it from the horse's mouth and not a weasel worded politician.

Italy is one of the countries that have explicitly threatened legal action against AstraZeneca. However, from what you have been saying, there is no feasible basis for a potential legal action against AstraZeneca.

“I don't want to give judgment on anything that has been said. I can only tell you what's in their contract. And the contract is very clear. Our commitment is, I am quoting, “our best effort”. There are a lot of emotions running in this process right now, and I can understand it: people want vaccine. I want the vaccine too, I want it today. But, at the end of the day, it's a complicated process. We are getting there, in two or three months we will be at scale. We have a 17-million-dose production per month right now, it is actually not small at all. But of course, it’s less than people want and understandably so”.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

That is a first class article. Great when you get it from the horse's mouth and not a weasel worded politician.

great Article.

I found this the most heartening statement

First of all, we believe that the efficacy of one dose is sufficient: 100 percent protection against severe disease and hospitalisation,

So the governments course of direction is 100% the correct thing to do, to ease the pressure on the NHS.

Yes, just to reiterate - as far as AstraZeneca are concerned, the root of the delay in vaccine delivery to the EU lies in the fact it took the EU three months longer than the UK to seal a deal with AstraZeneca. Everything about the EU’s approach to its vaccination programme seems to take too long.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Chris

Yes, just to reiterate - as far as AstraZeneca are concerned, the root of the delay in vaccine delivery to the EU lies in the fact it took the EU three months longer than the UK to seal a deal with AstraZeneca. Everything about the EU’s approach to its vaccination programme seems to take too long.

bear in mind the EU are banging on about delivery of the AZ vaccine, the EMA haven't even approved it for use yet, and probably won't for another couple of days.

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

For those who like their detail, this makes an interesting read.

https://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/20...nes-284349628/

That's really interesting, thank you! It's interesting that the production isn't transferring to other plants well. I bet AZ engineers are crawling all over Cobra Biomanufacturing and Oxford Biomedica right now to understand how they are doing things well (this vaccine is being made by contract manufacturers on the whole, not by AZ itself)

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

That's really interesting, thank you! It's interesting that the production isn't transferring to other plants well. I bet AZ engineers are crawling all over Cobra Biomanufacturing and Oxford Biomedica right now to understand how they are doing things well (this vaccine is being made by contract manufacturers on the whole, not by AZ itself)

I guess contract manufacturers are making the vaccine at no/minimal profit but gain in the long run on experience and technology transfer from AstraZeneca?

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I guess contract manufacturers are making the vaccine at no/minimal profit but gain in the long run on experience and technology transfer from AstraZeneca?

That's an interesting point. If the contract manufacturers are making COVID vaccines, they won't be making other products for other customers so I had a quick look at Oxford Biomedica and this was in their interim report for 2020;

In September, the Group announced an 18-month supply agreement under a three-year Master Supply and
Development Agreement with AstraZeneca for large-scale manufacture of AZD1222, for which the Group was
paid a £15 million capacity reservation fee. The Group expects, subject to satisfactory scale up of the process
and continuation of the vaccine programme, to receive additional revenues in excess of £35 million until the
end of 2021

That seems to be about half their annual revenue but certainly not all of their production capacity

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

That's an interesting point. If the contract manufacturers are making COVID vaccines, they won't be making other products for other customers so I had a quick look at Oxford Biomedica and this was in their interim report for 2020;

That seems to be about half their annual revenue but certainly not all of their production capacity

Good research and interestingly, revenue not income aka profit.