Covid, Phase II. Commonsense is the order of the day.

[Spursex]

Before I ask this, I'm going to emphasis that I am not an anti-vaxer and I encourage those to please get it when they get the option to do so.
But does anyone know (or able to point me to an article on this) why the UK regulator has been able to approve this vaccine but the equivalents in other countries/regions haven't done so yet? I'm thinking mostly in terms of the US and EU regulators. You would image they would have a relatively similar approach to some degree in terms of how they review the trial data and what they expect from it. I presume each of these regulators have got access to the same data by now and so is there something that these bodies are questioning that the UK didn't think was a concern? And before we get the sort of response we've heard in the last few days of "my da is better than your da", has there been any actual explanation of why the UK's da is the dog's bollocks?

ALL have access to the same data. The UK didn't follow the EU mandated approach to trials; instead it choose to assess all data all stages as the trials collated them - so in short by dropping the protocol the EU rigidly enforces across all members the UK's regulatory agency was able to be 'final data ready' and thus in a position to make a quick go/stop decision about each and every vaccine.

The US also (said they didn't have the manpower also followed the standard protocols.

It really was a question of approach, as so many drug discovery trials are conducted here now, we were ready for it.

It has probably bought the UK a one month lead on the analysis; which, by the way it has now shared via the WHO to any country in the World who wants to see it.

 

[Spursex]

Pretty pretty worrying then...how can anyone really trust these big corporate pharmaceutical 'money making machines' Their track records in putting out awful life changing solutions as shown by the court cases, and heavy fines they seem to brush off as 'part of the business we are in', ESPECIALLY in US companies.

We should always be concerned about big business practices; but that isn't the issue here, it's the bodies that regulate these things (especially in the uk) who have the research scientists who re capable of making these decisions - the UK in particular has one of the large regulatory panel of scientists available who can do this.

And now they have made their decision, others will follow soon enough.

 

[Harry-Kari]

One question I have is that if the vaccines induce the body’s immune system to produce quantities of anti-bodies would this mean that with current testing methods someone who has been vaccinated would show positive using these tests or are there other indicators that would be present if someone genuinely is infected with COVID?

 

[Pompey Yid]

Morning all, I/we have a couple of questions for all the in the knows....

As Mrs PY suffers with Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy/Complex Regional Pain Syndrome...RSD/CRPS for short, basically a completely knackered/broken nervous system, it is a rare ailment/illness.

My/our first question is, as Mrs PY is top of the tree in vulnerability...
"should she have the vaccine if and when offered to her?" because I/we are wary of any side affects regards her ailment/illness.

The second question is, if Mrs PY refused the vaccine...
"would she be registered as non-compliance?" though she is wary of unforeseen reactions.

Sorry thirdly...
"does anyone think that we should speak to Doctors/Medical people regards the Vaccine and its compliance with RSD/CRPS, before she gets the offer of Vaccination?"

I/we look to any advice, cheers all.

 

[Pompey Yid]

One question I have is that if the vaccines induce the body’s immune system to produce quantities of anti-bodies would this mean that with current testing methods someone who has been vaccinated would show positive using these tests or are there other indicators that would be present if someone genuinely is infected with COVID?

Bloody hell Harry, just read your post after I posted mine, you talk about the Vaccine and the immune system, well that is a major problem of "whole body", Mrs PY, sufferers of RSD/CRPS, they do not have an immune system, that is why I have to keep her basically under lock and key if you like, nobody ever, even before Covid, was allowed indoors, even if it was only with a sniffle.

I am even more worried now regards the Vaccine.

 

[Harry-Kari]

Bloody hell Harry, just read your post after I posted mine, you talk about the Vaccine and the immune system, well that is a major problem of "whole body", Mrs PY, sufferers of RSD/CRPS, they do not have an immune system, that is why I have to keep her basically under lock and key if you like, nobody ever, even before Covid, was allowed indoors, even if it was only with a sniffle.

I am even more worried now regards the Vaccine.

PY, I just raised a question but don’t know the answer....I would say given your wife’s condition it’s obvious you need to consult with the medical team responsible for her treatment and make sure they in turn consult with the vaccine specialists...it could be that one type of vaccine may be more appropriate for her than another, given the differences in the way they work...for example, the Pfizer vaccine basically tells the body what enzymes to make at a cellular level using a different methodology to say the Oxford vaccine....but I’m no expert as you may have noticed.

 

[Pompey Yid]

PY, I just raised a question but don’t know the answer....I would say given your wife’s condition it’s obvious you need to consult with the medical team responsible for her treatment and make sure they in turn consult with the vaccine specialists...it could be that one type of vaccine may be more appropriate for her than another, given the differences in the way they work...for example, the Pfizer vaccine basically tells the body what enzymes to make at a cellular level using a different methodology to say the Oxford vaccine....but I’m no expert as you may have noticed.

Expert or not Harry, thanks for your reply, it does make a kind of sense.

 

[10Hoddle]

For the first time in my life, back in Jan 2019, I had the Flu Vaccine by advice from my Doc.

In April 2019 I was hospitalized with Influenza A, and again in Oct 2019. Very serious indeed. A young lady was in my ward right next to me, with the same disease and she passed away during my 7 day stay.

I'm definitely not an anti vaccer, and I'll be the first to get vaccinated to enable me to start flying to the Pacific Islands again for work if and when we open our international borders, but it does raise suspicion as to the accuracy of their 95% effective claims.

 

[Spursex]

One question I have is that if the vaccines induce the body’s immune system to produce quantities of anti-bodies would this mean that with current testing methods someone who has been vaccinated would show positive using these tests or are there other indicators that would be present if someone genuinely is infected with COVID?

In simple terms, the tests check for two types of reaction - IgG and IgM essentially if you have a standard test and both are positive you have the Virus, but as a vaccine doesn't use any live element to induce an immune response, all you would detect is one type.

So if you'd had the vaccine, you wouldn't show as 'positive' for the live virus, but the anti-bodies would show as present, but 'inert'.

If you have the vaccine, you cannot pass on the virus, as you haven't got it - you only have the response your immune system has been fooled into producing.

The AR's (adverse reactions) that have been logged so far are all very minor i.e. swelling on the area of the injection - a 'hangover' type feeling the day after, and some who felt a little under the weather for a couple of days. But literally that is the totallity of the recorded AR's.

 

[Spursex]

Morning all, I/we have a couple of questions for all the in the knows....

As Mrs PY suffers with Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy/Complex Regional Pain Syndrome...RSD/CRPS for short, basically a completely knackered/broken nervous system, it is a rare ailment/illness.

My/our first question is, as Mrs PY is top of the tree in vulnerability...
"should she have the vaccine if and when offered to her?" because I/we are wary of any side affects regards her ailment/illness.

The second question is, if Mrs PY refused the vaccine...
"would she be registered as non-compliance?" though she is wary of unforeseen reactions.

Sorry thirdly...
"does anyone think that we should speak to Doctors/Medical people regards the Vaccine and its compliance with RSD/CRPS, before she gets the offer of Vaccination?"

I/we look to any advice, cheers all.

Be led by ther doctors; but I have asked the question to someone who should know and their response is that as long as their is no known immune system adverse response then she should be assured that the quicker she gets it, the better. The alturnative is horrible - risk catching it and then fighting what we know can be a deadly disease.

The known AR's are all minor (see above response to Hari).

Chances of her having an unknown response given the vaccines are all inert - are in the opinion of who I asked (who has/is part of the effort) 'infintisimal' - but again the advice was talk to the doctors and her doctors at hand to reassure yourself.

It could be they will closely monitor her for a couple of days, but probably that's about it.

If she refused the vaccine, I personally (assuming you've asked all the questions that concern you of the doctors) would say it would be an act of folly that risked her life.

IN respect of you last question, I refer to above - ask your doctor(s) in advance so that you can be prepared.

But in ending, the view I took away from my conversation is that you and your wife should be no more concerned that anyone else.

But, I repeat, don't take these answers as definiative - speak to your doctor about all your concerns first!

 

[Harry-Kari]

In simple terms, the tests check for two types of reaction - IgG and IgM essentially if you have a standard test and both are positive you have the Virus, but as a vaccine doesn't use any live element to induce an immune response, all you would detect is one type.

So if you'd had the vaccine, you wouldn't show as 'positive' for the live virus, but the anti-bodies would show as present, but 'inert'.

If you have the vaccine, you cannot pass on the virus, as you haven't got it - you only have the response your immune system has been fooled into producing.

The AR's (adverse reactions) that have been logged so far are all very minor i.e. swelling on the area of the injection - a 'hangover' type feeling the day after, and some who felt a little under the weather for a couple of days. But literally that is the totallity of the recorded AR's.

Thanks Ex...great explanation.

 

[Spursex]

For the first time in my life, back in Jan 2019, I had the Flu Vaccine by advice from my Doc.

In April 2019 I was hospitalized with Influenza A, and again in Oct 2019. Very serious indeed. A young lady was in my ward right next to me, with the same disease and she passed away during my 7 day stay.

I'm definitely not an anti vaccer, and I'll be the first to get vaccinated to enable me to start flying to the Pacific Islands again for work if and when we open our international borders, but it does raise suspicion as to the accuracy of their 95% effective claims.

There are many different strains, I also was vaccinated in 2019 against the known strains we had in the northern hemisphere but ended up catching, Type B - which last year was particularly nasty but only represented around 2% of all flu's last year. The flu vaccine is an attempt to cover the most likely strains - but even then it may not prevent you catching one of those strains, but it will in 95% of cases lessen the symptoms.

I was ill for around 6 weeks, two with it - that were the worse flu symptoms I'd ever had and around 4-6 weeks of trying to recover.

So we need to understand the vaccine given her in the NH doesn't cover all strains, my guess is the same is true of the SH, so I wouldn't on the evidence you've mentioned her question it's efficacy.

See below:


What exactly is influenza B—and how is it different than influenza A?

It's important to remember that there are actually four types of influenza viruses: A, B, C, and D. Flu viruses A and B, however, are the only ones thought to cause the seasonal flu epidemics each winter (influenza C is typically mild, and influenza D affects cattle), according to the CDC.

Going a little deeper, influenza A and B viruses are each divided into different subtypes. Influenza A viruses are the trickiest: They're divided into subtypes based on two specific proteins, hemagglutinin (H) and neuraminidase (N)—ultimately, influenza A viruses can broken down into 198 different subtype combinations, per the CDC. Influenza B viruses, however, are classified into two lineages: B/Yamagata and B/Victoria.



A big difference between influenza B and influenza A is that influenza B typically comes after influenza A, hitting later in the season around springtime.

But as far as symptoms go, influenza A and B are quite alike. "There are more similarities than there are differences between influenza A and influenza B," Richard Martinello, MD, a Yale Medicine infectious disease expert, explains to Health. While in the laboratory they can be distinguished, from a clinical perspective, they can cause essentially the same typical influenza we usually think about.

According to the CDC, the symptoms for influenza B are similar to other strains, including fatigue, cough, fever (or chills), a sore throat, runny nose, muscle aches, headache, and gastrointestinal problems.

Another key difference between influenza A and B? While influenza B viruses are typically less common than influenza A viruses, influenza B infections can be more severe in children, and can lead to complications that require hospitalization or death.

 

[Greavswasthegreatest]

Life and death are intrinsic outcomes of the daily risks we all face. Be it a car journey, catching flu and having severe syptoms, over reactions to jabs, general health issues, catching a disease, genetic failings leading to complications and illness, taking a plane, arguing with a stranger, being in the wrong place at the wrong time, car rage, food poisoning, being an Arsenal fan, so you all make the life and death decisions in the main without a second thought.... ignoring the risks however remote they might be and getting on with life. You cannot cover all events and so tend not to analyse the risk of a decision on a moment by moment basis

(although Quantum Phyiscs with concepts of living simultaneously in parallel universes could potentially give you all the data to make the right decisions i.e turn left not right and not get hit by the bus, go into B&Q a moment later and avoid a bloke sneezing all over you and passing on Covid ... ha ha)


Seriously...
.
The difference I feel with this pandemic is that it has 'stopped us living' , it has restricted our daily life and choices and it has stopped family and friends contact and killed the economy, stopped many people receiving treatment for other illnesses etc. so whatever the risk of a bad reaction to the Covid vaccine, it is worth it to get back to 'living', as the alternative of forever living in fear of catching it and being totally constrained is not an option for me. I will welcome the jab and hopefully a high % will do so as well,,,,,,the benefits considerably outweigh the risks IMO

 

[Pompey Yid]

Be led by ther doctors; but I have asked the question to someone who should know and their response is that as long as their is no known immune system adverse response then she should be assured that the quicker she gets it, the better. The alturnative is horrible - risk catching it and then fighting what we know can be a deadly disease.

The known AR's are all minor (see above response to Hari).

Chances of her having an unknown response given the vaccines are all inert - are in the opinion of who I asked (who has/is part of the effort) 'infintisimal' - but again the advice was talk to the doctors and her doctors at hand to reassure yourself.

It could be they will closely monitor her for a couple of days, but probably that's about it.

If she refused the vaccine, I personally (assuming you've asked all the questions that concern you of the doctors) would say it would be an act of folly that risked her life.

IN respect of you last question, I refer to above - ask your doctor(s) in advance so that you can be prepared.

But in ending, the view I took away from my conversation is that you and your wife should be no more concerned that anyone else.

But, I repeat, don't take these answers as definiative - speak to your doctor about all your concerns first!

My/our thanks for that EX, but even speaking to Doctors, who actually no eff all about her ailment, as it is very rare, and I will add do not put themselves out to learn about it, isn't and hasn't helped her, thus this makes her even more worried, as she has been for the 17 years she has suffered with the ailment.

Thanks again anyway.

 

[Pompey Yid]

An add on to my reply to you EX, we are now talking about contacting Medics/Doctors/Surgeons in the US, as they have a massive knowledge of RSD/CRPS, but our one thought is "what do/will they know about our vaccine".

As you can probably imagine Mrs PY is scared stiff as am I for that matter.

 

[Nick Real Deal]

Ex will know more about this but a Doctor on the radio suggested the type of vaccines being developed and the way they work in the body could lead to advances in cancer treatments.

 

[Spursex]

An add on to my reply to you EX, we are now talking about contacting Medics/Doctors/Surgeons in the US, as they have a massive knowledge of RSD/CRPS, but our one thought is "what do/will they know about our vaccine".

As you can probably imagine Mrs PY is scared stiff as am I for that matter.

Be assured that ALL the vaccines that have and will be delivered are simply a method of fooling the immune system into triggering a normal immune response. Absolute none of the vaccines carry the virus themselves and so cannot harm those with underlying conditions - after your reply my firend reached out to Bath Uni where much of the UK research is conducted for your wifes condition.

She had this response (this is of course entirely one persons opinion and not absolutely not anyway official); they said:

'there is no known correleation/ adverse reaction between CRPS and any vaccine for any disease that we know of, we do not expect the new and coming vaccines to be any different', however, I have to say again this was one professionals private opinion to another and should NOT be relied upon. They also said:

IF your friend has any concerns they should discuss it with firstly their GP and if necessary they will be refered to pain management consultants who will have been briefed about any concerns you might have, however, as of now, we have absolutely no reason for concern.

I think personally you should assure you wife that in terms of impact on her body the immune system is unlikely to trigger anything that will harm her - probably the worst bit will be having the needle!

Good Luck Pompey, if I were you I'd book a call with your medical team and put it to them - the person I spoke to was confident that it's a non-issue (medical wise) but you need to establish that for yourself.

 

[Spursex]

Ex will know more about this but a Doctor on the radio suggested the type of vaccines being developed and the way they work in the body could lead to advances in cancer treatments.

Immunotherapy has always (in recent years) been the great hope for cancer treatment, and just recently an AI advance in research of how proteins work in our body (after the gene mapping success, we soon realized that we needed to know the shape of proteins i.e. how they fold, as this is what can make any cancer treatment effective or not) prior to this recent leap forward we'd only manage to map the shape of around 5,000 proteins in 25 years, we are now because of covid on our way to mapping the other 20,000 proteins we haven't or couldn't - this work could now be complete in less than a year.

This is a huge leap in finding effective drugs and shaping them to affect the messaging that causes cells to go awry and cause cancer. It holds out the promise of a) recognizing from blood tests when cells have and b) having effect remedies to block them from replicating out of control and c) to create new innovative made to measure treatment that could stop it in its tracks as you would be able to make tailor-made artificial proteins to cause your immune system to react to cancer cells and destroy them.

It's the holy grail of cancer research in some ways, brought about by the collaboration and leap forward due to covid.

It could cut new drug discovery times/testing etc by 60-70%, as well as costs.

 

[Nick Real Deal]

Very exciting stuff , thanks Ex for clarifying.

 

[Spursex]

Very exciting stuff , thanks Ex for clarifying.

I should add that there are some who think we need more granularity to really turn the corner - which in my view would mean we can expect to cure ALL diseases - but that's probably another 20 -30 years away !

This helps tell you what is going on with proteins: