FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > AstraZeneca now gives minimal protection
AstraZeneca now gives minimal protection
Jump to: Newest in thread
Hmm..
On the Andrew Marr shown just now...
Quote from ukhsa expert Dr Susan Hopkins ...
"Having had the vaccine more than 3 months ago which everyone in AstraZeneca is really in that basket now, means that there is minimal protection from the vaccine to prevent mild infection in the community and that means to prevent transmission. So particularly for those people that have had AstraZeneca they need to come forward but equally for Pfizer the reductions of infections and transmissions for both vaccines are very very similar....but a booster boosts both to around 70% against infection and transmission"
Older folks given astra zeneca seems a bit of a double whammy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Hmm..
On the Andrew Marr shown just now...
Quote from ukhsa expert Dr Susan Hopkins ...
"Having had the vaccine more than 3 months ago which everyone in AstraZeneca is really in that basket now, means that there is minimal protection from the vaccine to prevent mild infection in the community and that means to prevent transmission. So particularly for those people that have had AstraZeneca they need to come forward but equally for Pfizer the reductions of infections and transmissions for both vaccines are very very similar....but a booster boosts both to around 70% against infection and transmission"
Older folks given astra zeneca seems a bit of a double whammy. "
So, the moral of the story is get your booster.
It's a bit of a worry in the next few weeks when this strain enters the more vulnerable section.
Hopefully, most will be 3 jabbed.
The way its spreading should only take a few weeks to get some feedback.
The downside, during the next few weeks the younger generation tend to visit older folks more than ever.
Fingers crossed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Minimal protection against *mild* disease.
And booster helps.
No need to panic yet. "
No panic... But isn't it important to get those messages out there.?
If they had a campaign that said if you had az more than 3 months ago you now have minimal protection so get your booster now... I think it might get a few more people taking the booster. Previously we were told there was no known limit, then it was 6 months, then 5...now 3...good to know what kind of Condom we are wearing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Minimal protection against *mild* disease.
And booster helps.
No need to panic yet.
No panic... But isn't it important to get those messages out there.?
If they had a campaign that said if you had az more than 3 months ago you now have minimal protection so get your booster now... I think it might get a few more people taking the booster. Previously we were told there was no known limit, then it was 6 months, then 5...now 3...good to know what kind of Condom we are wearing. "
Absolutely. I'm not disagreeing with you.
We find out more as we go on.
(I have no idea what condom I'm wearing, as it were - I still haven't been unblinded  ) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Minimal protection against *mild* disease.
And booster helps.
No need to panic yet.
No panic... But isn't it important to get those messages out there.?
If they had a campaign that said if you had az more than 3 months ago you now have minimal protection so get your booster now... I think it might get a few more people taking the booster. Previously we were told there was no known limit, then it was 6 months, then 5...now 3...good to know what kind of Condom we are wearing.
Absolutely. I'm not disagreeing with you.
We find out more as we go on.
(I have no idea what condom I'm wearing, as it were - I still haven't been unblinded )"
Yep.. And we've had these exchanges before. Its the first time I've heard an "official expert" call out az specifically, that there is a "limit" of 3 months and the word "minimal" in context of vaccine protection. And its hidden away on a Sunday morning BBC politics show. If they want people boosted they need to shout it loud... "we over egged the vax effective duration, we now know after 3 months for infection and transmission it's minimal so go and get your booster"... They should probably make sure the covid booster website allows it to be after 90 days rather than 180 as well... "
Anyway..apologies but just felt I had my eyes opened a bit this morning by said doctor. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Minimal protection against *mild* disease.
And booster helps.
No need to panic yet.
No panic... But isn't it important to get those messages out there.?
If they had a campaign that said if you had az more than 3 months ago you now have minimal protection so get your booster now... I think it might get a few more people taking the booster. Previously we were told there was no known limit, then it was 6 months, then 5...now 3...good to know what kind of Condom we are wearing.
Absolutely. I'm not disagreeing with you.
We find out more as we go on.
(I have no idea what condom I'm wearing, as it were - I still haven't been unblinded )
Yep.. And we've had these exchanges before. Its the first time I've heard an "official expert" call out az specifically, that there is a "limit" of 3 months and the word "minimal" in context of vaccine protection. And its hidden away on a Sunday morning BBC politics show. If they want people boosted they need to shout it loud... "we over egged the vax effective duration, we now know after 3 months for infection and transmission it's minimal so go and get your booster"... They should probably make sure the covid booster website allows it to be after 90 days rather than 180 as well... "
Anyway..apologies but just felt I had my eyes opened a bit this morning by said doctor. "
One question to ask in all of this....
Is the "said" doctor upholding their hypocratic oath and actually seeing patients now?
Or, could they be on the payroll of Pfizer maybe??? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Minimal protection against *mild* disease.
And booster helps.
No need to panic yet.
No panic... But isn't it important to get those messages out there.?
If they had a campaign that said if you had az more than 3 months ago you now have minimal protection so get your booster now... I think it might get a few more people taking the booster. Previously we were told there was no known limit, then it was 6 months, then 5...now 3...good to know what kind of Condom we are wearing.
Absolutely. I'm not disagreeing with you.
We find out more as we go on.
(I have no idea what condom I'm wearing, as it were - I still haven't been unblinded )
Yep.. And we've had these exchanges before. Its the first time I've heard an "official expert" call out az specifically, that there is a "limit" of 3 months and the word "minimal" in context of vaccine protection. And its hidden away on a Sunday morning BBC politics show. If they want people boosted they need to shout it loud... "we over egged the vax effective duration, we now know after 3 months for infection and transmission it's minimal so go and get your booster"... They should probably make sure the covid booster website allows it to be after 90 days rather than 180 as well... "
Anyway..apologies but just felt I had my eyes opened a bit this morning by said doctor. "
Absolutely. I'm not following the same stuff you are - I don't own a television and am not looking at the media (I mostly follow virologists, immunologists, and epidemiologists and cry as my brain bleeds). I suppose I've known for awhile that AZ and J&J have more limited duration in immunity - and Omicron makes that worse. (All of the vaccines approved in the UK are well in excess of expectations that were set in the first half of 2020, but the mRNA vaccines do have an advantage. Omicron is a disadvantage for all of them, and previous infection. Boosting helps all of them) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *ovebjsMan
over a year ago
Bristol |
"Hmm..
On the Andrew Marr shown just now...
Quote from ukhsa expert Dr Susan Hopkins ...
"Having had the vaccine more than 3 months ago which everyone in AstraZeneca is really in that basket now, means that there is minimal protection from the vaccine to prevent mild infection in the community and that means to prevent transmission. So particularly for those people that have had AstraZeneca they need to come forward but equally for Pfizer the reductions of infections and transmissions for both vaccines are very very similar....but a booster boosts both to around 70% against infection and transmission"
Older folks given astra zeneca seems a bit of a double whammy. "
Does she have shares in Pfizer? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Minimal protection against *mild* disease.
And booster helps.
No need to panic yet.
No panic... But isn't it important to get those messages out there.?
If they had a campaign that said if you had az more than 3 months ago you now have minimal protection so get your booster now... I think it might get a few more people taking the booster. Previously we were told there was no known limit, then it was 6 months, then 5...now 3...good to know what kind of Condom we are wearing.
Absolutely. I'm not disagreeing with you.
We find out more as we go on.
(I have no idea what condom I'm wearing, as it were - I still haven't been unblinded )
Yep.. And we've had these exchanges before. Its the first time I've heard an "official expert" call out az specifically, that there is a "limit" of 3 months and the word "minimal" in context of vaccine protection. And its hidden away on a Sunday morning BBC politics show. If they want people boosted they need to shout it loud... "we over egged the vax effective duration, we now know after 3 months for infection and transmission it's minimal so go and get your booster"... They should probably make sure the covid booster website allows it to be after 90 days rather than 180 as well... "
Anyway..apologies but just felt I had my eyes opened a bit this morning by said doctor.
One question to ask in all of this....
Is the "said" doctor upholding their hypocratic oath and actually seeing patients now?
Or, could they be on the payroll of Pfizer maybe???"
Well yes indeed.. And when is an expert not an expert?.. But she had nice hair so I'm sure she uses timotei.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Minimal protection against *mild* disease.
And booster helps.
No need to panic yet.
No panic... But isn't it important to get those messages out there.?
If they had a campaign that said if you had az more than 3 months ago you now have minimal protection so get your booster now... I think it might get a few more people taking the booster. Previously we were told there was no known limit, then it was 6 months, then 5...now 3...good to know what kind of Condom we are wearing.
Absolutely. I'm not disagreeing with you.
We find out more as we go on.
(I have no idea what condom I'm wearing, as it were - I still haven't been unblinded )
Yep.. And we've had these exchanges before. Its the first time I've heard an "official expert" call out az specifically, that there is a "limit" of 3 months and the word "minimal" in context of vaccine protection. And its hidden away on a Sunday morning BBC politics show. If they want people boosted they need to shout it loud... "we over egged the vax effective duration, we now know after 3 months for infection and transmission it's minimal so go and get your booster"... They should probably make sure the covid booster website allows it to be after 90 days rather than 180 as well... "
Anyway..apologies but just felt I had my eyes opened a bit this morning by said doctor.
One question to ask in all of this....
Is the "said" doctor upholding their hypocratic oath and actually seeing patients now?
Or, could they be on the payroll of Pfizer maybe???"
What role do you believe that the Hippocratic oath plays here? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Minimal protection against *mild* disease.
And booster helps.
No need to panic yet.
No panic... But isn't it important to get those messages out there.?
If they had a campaign that said if you had az more than 3 months ago you now have minimal protection so get your booster now... I think it might get a few more people taking the booster. Previously we were told there was no known limit, then it was 6 months, then 5...now 3...good to know what kind of Condom we are wearing.
Absolutely. I'm not disagreeing with you.
We find out more as we go on.
(I have no idea what condom I'm wearing, as it were - I still haven't been unblinded )
Yep.. And we've had these exchanges before. Its the first time I've heard an "official expert" call out az specifically, that there is a "limit" of 3 months and the word "minimal" in context of vaccine protection. And its hidden away on a Sunday morning BBC politics show. If they want people boosted they need to shout it loud... "we over egged the vax effective duration, we now know after 3 months for infection and transmission it's minimal so go and get your booster"... They should probably make sure the covid booster website allows it to be after 90 days rather than 180 as well... "
Anyway..apologies but just felt I had my eyes opened a bit this morning by said doctor.
One question to ask in all of this....
Is the "said" doctor upholding their hypocratic oath and actually seeing patients now?
Or, could they be on the payroll of Pfizer maybe???
What role do you believe that the Hippocratic oath plays here?"
Well most seem to not allow people to actually get a face to face appointment at the moment.
Patients need to be seen and not fobbed off over the telephone. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Minimal protection against *mild* disease.
And booster helps.
No need to panic yet.
No panic... But isn't it important to get those messages out there.?
If they had a campaign that said if you had az more than 3 months ago you now have minimal protection so get your booster now... I think it might get a few more people taking the booster. Previously we were told there was no known limit, then it was 6 months, then 5...now 3...good to know what kind of Condom we are wearing.
Absolutely. I'm not disagreeing with you.
We find out more as we go on.
(I have no idea what condom I'm wearing, as it were - I still haven't been unblinded )
Yep.. And we've had these exchanges before. Its the first time I've heard an "official expert" call out az specifically, that there is a "limit" of 3 months and the word "minimal" in context of vaccine protection. And its hidden away on a Sunday morning BBC politics show. If they want people boosted they need to shout it loud... "we over egged the vax effective duration, we now know after 3 months for infection and transmission it's minimal so go and get your booster"... They should probably make sure the covid booster website allows it to be after 90 days rather than 180 as well... "
Anyway..apologies but just felt I had my eyes opened a bit this morning by said doctor.
One question to ask in all of this....
Is the "said" doctor upholding their hypocratic oath and actually seeing patients now?
Or, could they be on the payroll of Pfizer maybe???
What role do you believe that the Hippocratic oath plays here?
Well most seem to not allow people to actually get a face to face appointment at the moment.
Patients need to be seen and not fobbed off over the telephone."
So what you're saying is that this person in the media is failing in their upholding of the Hippocratic oath because other doctors are doing telephone consultations?
I hope I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, because there's no logic in that statement. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Well my az/immunity from actually having covid is doing something right. Out of a group of 6 people, all vaxxed, I'm the only one who hasn't caught it after a get together few weeks back. Thankfully all mild cases.
I'm the only one who had az vaccine too, so I'm counting it as a win for az  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *litterbabeWoman
over a year ago
hiding from cock pics. |
It leaves me scratching my head about what help the vaccine passport provides.
As far as showing a negative lateral flow test, I find that useful as it is up-to-date, but for somebody who had two jabs, I don't really understand what showing proof of that before entering anywhere does.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Surely it's not news that vaccines designed for the initial virus may not have the same efficacy against subsequent varients?
With such things were going to be playing catch up for a while yet but we are better than we were this time twelve months ago.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Well my az/immunity from actually having covid is doing something right. Out of a group of 6 people, all vaxxed, I'm the only one who hasn't caught it after a get together few weeks back. Thankfully all mild cases.
I'm the only one who had az vaccine too, so I'm counting it as a win for az "
He's not the messiah.. he's a very naughty boy.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
Interesting and worrying. Now let me start by saying this is not bait for either the pro or anti vax crowd but a genuine question.
For almost two years now the pro brigade have pointed to the success of “historic” vaccines as evidence of why the Covid Vaccines are a good thing. They cite the virtual eradication of polio and smallpox and the dramatic fall in measles as evidence that the Covid Vaccines are equally a scientific miracle.
How often do any of those cited historic vaccines need a booster to remain effective?
Should the Covid Vaccines (and Flu for that matter) really be categorised as vaccines in the same way as those historic vaccines? Or are they really in a different category?
Based on what has happened, then how frequently will we need boosters? Will they need to tweak every time we get a major mutation causing a variant of concern?
Is there any concern about an excessive build up in the body caused by multiple frequent boosters?
Are we possibly sleepwalking into a long term issue here caused by short term reactive thinking?
The anti vax brigade often cite the “experimental nature” of these Covid “vaccines”. They also point at the contracted time periods then pro vax debunk concerns here with concurrent running of phase 1, 2, 3 and the huge resources and volume of test subjects. However, when anti vax then say it is still being tested as we have a live and very substantial phase 4 trial underway, this is poo pooed and hand waved away as “normal”. It isn’t normal because of the sheer scale and numbers involved.
@_naswingdress says above “we are continually learning” which is right and true BUT if we are learning (ie not complete in our knowledge) then this very much remains a test as evidenced by need for boosters and frequency of those dramatically increasing!
Personally I do consider this to be worrying. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It leaves me scratching my head about what help the vaccine passport provides.
As far as showing a negative lateral flow test, I find that useful as it is up-to-date, but for somebody who had two jabs, I don't really understand what showing proof of that before entering anywhere does.
"
Well exactly. I can't believe covid passes in their current format are going to be around in 12 months time. If ever there was a Hans Christian Anderson emperors new clothes thing.. Telling people they are safe because they had a jab that has minimal protection against infection after 6 months is it.
I'd be very interested to look back in a years time to see if covid passes in the place of a test actually helped the spread of the bloody thing it was designed to prevent. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It leaves me scratching my head about what help the vaccine passport provides.
As far as showing a negative lateral flow test, I find that useful as it is up-to-date, but for somebody who had two jabs, I don't really understand what showing proof of that before entering anywhere does.
Well exactly. I can't believe covid passes in their current format are going to be around in 12 months time. If ever there was a Hans Christian Anderson emperors new clothes thing.. Telling people they are safe because they had a jab that has minimal protection against infection after 6 months is it.
I'd be very interested to look back in a years time to see if covid passes in the place of a test actually helped the spread of the bloody thing it was designed to prevent. "
..... Ohhhhhhh hang on a minute... Do you think that...? Noooooo... Surely not. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Hmm..
On the Andrew Marr shown just now...
Quote from ukhsa expert Dr Susan Hopkins ...
"Having had the vaccine more than 3 months ago which everyone in AstraZeneca is really in that basket now, means that there is minimal protection from the vaccine to prevent mild infection in the community and that means to prevent transmission. So particularly for those people that have had AstraZeneca they need to come forward but equally for Pfizer the reductions of infections and transmissions for both vaccines are very very similar....but a booster boosts both to around 70% against infection and transmission"
Older folks given astra zeneca seems a bit of a double whammy. "
Not really because most of them have had their boosters already. We’re 20 million people deep in boosters. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It leaves me scratching my head about what help the vaccine passport provides.
As far as showing a negative lateral flow test, I find that useful as it is up-to-date, but for somebody who had two jabs, I don't really understand what showing proof of that before entering anywhere does.
One good point of the pass..if you do test positive you will not be able to generate a NHS pass until your isolation has expired so at least it 'helps'!! prevent someone who knowingly has Covid from taking a f#*k it attitude and spreading it
"
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
My last on this as I must go and wash my smalls...
I was also troubled to hear the maths of the experts...
Apparently a third of all new infections are omicron. Now... Given there were over 50k infections yesterday one might safely assume there were a third of 50k so roughly... 17k omicron cases yesterday.... But total omicron cases were over 633 yesterday (and not 17k) ...i mean just splitting hairs but come on you experts.
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-another-633-omicron-cases-found-in-the-uk-in-biggest-daily-jump-of-the-variant-12492879
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
@Birdln - it's my understanding that breakthrough infections occurred with most vaccines until the situation reached equilibrium, which we're a long way off. (the scale of genetic sequencing of disease is unprecedentedly here, so we have a lot of information)
I don't know why it's different in the UK (I'm thinking Australia), but tetanus boosters come to my mind (not sure if I misremember or advice has changed, but I had a tetanus booster at 15, and was given one at 23 in lieu of the one they said I was due at 25). I also had an MMR booster at 15. https://www.healthdirect.gov.au/tetanus#prevented
It'd be ideal if we'd had a heads up about Covid in, I don't know, 2015, and been able to work all this out before we were thrown into the proverbial fire. But it's not where we are. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"My last on this as I must go and wash my smalls...
I was also troubled to hear the maths of the experts...
Apparently a third of all new infections are omicron. Now... Given there were over 50k infections yesterday one might safely assume there were a third of 50k so roughly... 17k omicron cases yesterday.... But total omicron cases were over 633 yesterday (and not 17k) ...i mean just splitting hairs but come on you experts.
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-another-633-omicron-cases-found-in-the-uk-in-biggest-daily-jump-of-the-variant-12492879
"
Your comprehension skills need brushing up. A third of cases in LONDON are believed to be omicron. Not in the whole country.
Also, the estimate is not the same as confirmed cases. They only randomly sample a small number of positive cases, and then they multiply that up by the population. So confirmed vs estimated is always different. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"My last on this as I must go and wash my smalls...
I was also troubled to hear the maths of the experts...
Apparently a third of all new infections are omicron. Now... Given there were over 50k infections yesterday one might safely assume there were a third of 50k so roughly... 17k omicron cases yesterday.... But total omicron cases were over 633 yesterday (and not 17k) ...i mean just splitting hairs but come on you experts.
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-another-633-omicron-cases-found-in-the-uk-in-biggest-daily-jump-of-the-variant-12492879
"
The covid Zoe app which has 4.75 million people reporting in daily has 85k new infections daily at present, so yes the numbers are a bit all over the place although it's never going to be totally exact data..
Ps, not an expert just the messenger on this point ..  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The biggest issue for me is the ‘silver bullet’ effect of the vaccines, obviously not the case is it !
We were told these vaccines were pretty much good against most variants, now we have a mild variant that we need boosters against, at this rate I’ll be boostering every 3-6 months, not sure that’s healthy for our bodies ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Hmm..
On the Andrew Marr shown just now...
Quote from ukhsa expert Dr Susan Hopkins ...
"Having had the vaccine more than 3 months ago which everyone in AstraZeneca is really in that basket now, means that there is minimal protection from the vaccine to prevent mild infection in the community and that means to prevent transmission. So particularly for those people that have had AstraZeneca they need to come forward but equally for Pfizer the reductions of infections and transmissions for both vaccines are very very similar....but a booster boosts both to around 70% against infection and transmission"
Older folks given astra zeneca seems a bit of a double whammy. "
So we treat them now the same as the unvaccinated and put an X on their door and start thinking about some sort of camp system. Maybe with a very good rail infrastructure |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Interesting and worrying. Now let me start by saying this is not bait for either the pro or anti vax crowd but a genuine question.
For almost two years now the pro brigade have pointed to the success of “historic” vaccines as evidence of why the Covid Vaccines are a good thing. They cite the virtual eradication of polio and smallpox and the dramatic fall in measles as evidence that the Covid Vaccines are equally a scientific miracle.
How often do any of those cited historic vaccines need a booster to remain effective?
Should the Covid Vaccines (and Flu for that matter) really be categorised as vaccines in the same way as those historic vaccines? Or are they really in a different category?
Based on what has happened, then how frequently will we need boosters? Will they need to tweak every time we get a major mutation causing a variant of concern?
Is there any concern about an excessive build up in the body caused by multiple frequent boosters?
Are we possibly sleepwalking into a long term issue here caused by short term reactive thinking?
The anti vax brigade often cite the “experimental nature” of these Covid “vaccines”. They also point at the contracted time periods then pro vax debunk concerns here with concurrent running of phase 1, 2, 3 and the huge resources and volume of test subjects. However, when anti vax then say it is still being tested as we have a live and very substantial phase 4 trial underway, this is poo pooed and hand waved away as “normal”. It isn’t normal because of the sheer scale and numbers involved.
@_naswingdress says above “we are continually learning” which is right and true BUT if we are learning (ie not complete in our knowledge) then this very much remains a test as evidenced by need for boosters and frequency of those dramatically increasing!
Personally I do consider this to be worrying."
... And further the debate point around long term evidence.... Well we've now discovered after 18 to 24 months of evidence that they wane quickly as far as onward transmission effectiveness.. 6 months, 5 months, 3 months... These are all good learnings and learnings that only come from the passage of time. Which is both good and bad... Its good to learn it and therefore we have more knowledge of how to use the tool we have built.. ... Its bad science to have our experts make assumptions that they last indefinitely / longer...and only now be sharing it with the public. When the evidence / numbers has been pointing in that direction for quite some time. Suddenly we care about infections again... When we've been told they don't matter for 6 months.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"My last on this as I must go and wash my smalls...
I was also troubled to hear the maths of the experts...
Apparently a third of all new infections are omicron. Now... Given there were over 50k infections yesterday one might safely assume there were a third of 50k so roughly... 17k omicron cases yesterday.... But total omicron cases were over 633 yesterday (and not 17k) ...i mean just splitting hairs but come on you experts.
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-another-633-omicron-cases-found-in-the-uk-in-biggest-daily-jump-of-the-variant-12492879
Your comprehension skills need brushing up. A third of cases in LONDON are believed to be omicron. Not in the whole country.
Also, the estimate is not the same as confirmed cases. They only randomly sample a small number of positive cases, and then they multiply that up by the population. So confirmed vs estimated is always different."
So long as policy decisions are being made on accurate confirmed numbers or better estimates fine. If its the rubbish a lot of the experts are putting into the media then that is going to lead to bad policy and bad execution, its reasonable to expect better. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Minimal protection against *mild* disease.
And booster helps.
No need to panic yet.
No panic... But isn't it important to get those messages out there.?
If they had a campaign that said if you had az more than 3 months ago you now have minimal protection so get your booster now... I think it might get a few more people taking the booster. Previously we were told there was no known limit, then it was 6 months, then 5...now 3...good to know what kind of Condom we are wearing.
Absolutely. I'm not disagreeing with you.
We find out more as we go on.
(I have no idea what condom I'm wearing, as it were - I still haven't been unblinded )
Yep.. And we've had these exchanges before. Its the first time I've heard an "official expert" call out az specifically, that there is a "limit" of 3 months and the word "minimal" in context of vaccine protection. And its hidden away on a Sunday morning BBC politics show. If they want people boosted they need to shout it loud... "we over egged the vax effective duration, we now know after 3 months for infection and transmission it's minimal so go and get your booster"... They should probably make sure the covid booster website allows it to be after 90 days rather than 180 as well... "
Anyway..apologies but just felt I had my eyes opened a bit this morning by said doctor.
One question to ask in all of this....
Is the "said" doctor upholding their hypocratic oath and actually seeing patients now?
Or, could they be on the payroll of Pfizer maybe???
What role do you believe that the Hippocratic oath plays here?"
Haha, was about to ask the same. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Here's a bit more about it...from the guardian...
"The study follows recent UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) data, suggesting those who have been double-jabbed with the AstraZeneca vaccine have about 10% protection against symptomatic infection with Omicron six months after their second jab, compared with 40% protection against the Delta variant"
Here's the full article..
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/13/can-you-trust-a-negative-lateral-flow-covid-test
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
