UK first in the world to have a vaccine for Covid19

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Why does it usually take 5-10 years to develop a new vaccine safely? Why are the vaccine makers except from liability of any damage caused by the vaccine?

You ask two very good questions the first part I think is easy enough to answer; as I said in my OP the level of investment into these vaccines has been immense. Some of the best bio-medical minds have came together and been given unlimited funding to create this thing that's why they have done it so quickly because usually they are not so well funded and its not often that they work collaboratively. We have also seen governments around the world make it easier to push this through, working to reduce bureaucracy making it easier to get the approval quicker.

I actually think this is the best thing about Covid, countries around the world have seen how hard a nasty little vaccine can hit them economically therefore I believe in the future we can expect higher levels of research into vaccines and infectious diseases surveillance so that in the future when we get hit again, possibly by a much deadlier virus we should be better prepared.

Now as for the second part of your question regarding vaccine makers being exempt from liability of damage caused by the vaccine I am not aware of such an arrangement existing within the UK so I can't comment, perhaps if you link to it I would be able to give you my thoughts.

What about the fact that at least two of the vaccines are something like 95% effective? What are the odds on that!

One of them claims it will 100% stop a severe case of covid from occurring.

How do you explain this?

originally posted by: dug88
a reply to: Catch_a_Fire

I'm sure there's going to be a great new black market for doctor's notes saying you've been vaccinated. A couple hundred bucks, the right doc, no problem. I mean, it's how the medical cannabis licenses used to work here. Man there's a lot of young people here with insomnia and nausea.

I thought the vaccine would contain luciferase-tagged protein so no cheating as you will glow in the dark. I would be looking for an exemption writing Dr.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Yes, Pfizer will be exempt from liability, as will all the other vaccine manufacturers.

And that is where I make a decision to see how it goes over the next couple of years before deciding whether I want to accept the vaccine.

Sure there have been no major reported side effects, but who knows what the long term effects could be? That’s why it usually takes years for any vaccine to be fully licensed for use on the population.

I’m not an anti-Vaxxer, but I am a cautious person and will not be rolling up my sleeve anytime soon. The Government have said they will not make it compulsory, but no doubt we will need to start producing evidence of vaccination for holidays abroad, visits to the pub, concerts, restaurants etc.

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: angelchemuel
The Chinese don’t seem to be as scared of the Rona.
Their kids started back to school in August. Real schools, not virtual.
Sout h China Morning Post

If 300 million Chinese dropped dead they wouldn't blink an eye...

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

I’m not an anti-Vaxxer, but I am a cautious person and will not be rolling up my sleeve anytime soon. The Government have said they will not make it compulsory, but no doubt we will need to start producing evidence of vaccination for holidays abroad, visits to the pub, concerts, restaurants etc.

Me too with about 50 of them in me, but in another discussion it seems these are based on RNA, so I guess a new process compared to how vaccines are typically done that has a long history of data, so we do not have that with an RNA vaccine. I want to give my thanks to the Russians, Chinese and Brits for being the guinea pigs, but we all know what goes on in Russia and China would not be known, so we will watch the Brits closely.

originally posted by: LookingAtMars

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Why does it usually take 5-10 years to develop a new vaccine safely? Why are the vaccine makers except from liability of any damage caused by the vaccine?

You ask two very good questions the first part I think is easy enough to answer; as I said in my OP the level of investment into these vaccines has been immense. Some of the best bio-medical minds have came together and been given unlimited funding to create this thing that's why they have done it so quickly because usually they are not so well funded and its not often that they work collaboratively. We have also seen governments around the world make it easier to push this through, working to reduce bureaucracy making it easier to get the approval quicker.

I actually think this is the best thing about Covid, countries around the world have seen how hard a nasty little vaccine can hit them economically therefore I believe in the future we can expect higher levels of research into vaccines and infectious diseases surveillance so that in the future when we get hit again, possibly by a much deadlier virus we should be better prepared.

Now as for the second part of your question regarding vaccine makers being exempt from liability of damage caused by the vaccine I am not aware of such an arrangement existing within the UK so I can't comment, perhaps if you link to it I would be able to give you my thoughts.

What about the fact that at least two of the vaccines are something like 95% effective? What are the odds on that!

One of them claims it will 100% stop a severe case of covid from occurring.

How do you explain this?

Which is that? Not saying your wrong but from what I've seen Pfizer is claiming the highest rate with others claiming 66 - 90% effective (Oxford, Sputnik). I haven't seen any (other) manufacturer claim 95% or 100%.

While on paper the Pfizer vaccine is 95% effective, it requires cryogenic (-73C) storage to keep it stable/sterile so can only be dispenssped at hospitals. The praticality/risk of this makes it less effective in the real world hence the Uk gov buying the lions share of vaccines from the oxford one which remains stable/sterile at 2C and can be stored in a fridge.

Personally I think the government are wrong to offer it to care homes first due to possible risks of infection/stress on travel plus the main reason people end up in care homes is they're unable to give consent or make sound judgements. Relatives in that situation certainly don't have the mental awareness to make that decision due to Alzheimers.

a reply to: bastion

I don't believe it is true but I have heard/read it claimed many times.

Found this with a quick DDG search.

2 Companies Say Their Vaccines Are 95% Effective. What Does That Mean?

The front-runners in the vaccine race seem to be working far better than anyone expected: Pfizer and BioNTech announced this week that their vaccine had an efficacy rate of 95 percent. Moderna put the figure for its vaccine at 94.5 percent. In Russia, the makers of the Sputnik vaccine claimed their efficacy rate was over 90 percent.

“These are game changers,” said Dr. Gregory Poland, a vaccine researcher at the Mayo Clinic. “We were all expecting 50 to 70 percent.” Indeed, the Food and Drug Administration had said it would consider granting emergency approval for vaccines that showed just 50 percent efficacy.

From the headlines, you might well assume that these vaccines — which some people may receive in a matter of weeks — will protect 95 out of 100 people who get them. But that’s not actually what the trials have shown. Exactly how the vaccines perform out in the real world will depend on a lot of factors we just don’t have answers to yet — such as whether vaccinated people can get asymptomatic infections and how many people will get vaccinated.

???
Russia has vaccine since few months. Mass vaccinations starting in two weeks. China already had some vaccine and vaccinated people months ago. UK first?

Pfizer is an American company and BioNTech is German. The breakthrough technology for the vaccine was developed by BioNTech. So maybe it’s correct to say the UK is the first to have a vaccine, but only because it approved the use of one developed outside the UK.

The incoming Biden Administration said they would ensure other countries get the vaccine before Americans do.

Today is a great day for us Brits, freedom beckons! I’m hoping to get to the front of the vaccine que if possible as I’ve got a holiday booked in February. My mate, Terry has his Dad in the local care home, he’s very old and we both agree that the vaccine would frankly be wasted on him. For fifty quid, Terry has agreed to swap the old boy out for me on the day of the injection, fingers crossed all goes well and I’ll be in Benidorm before you can say ‘No deal’.

a reply to: carewemust

but isnt Trump still in charge until January at least, also accoring to some in the know (yourself included) he will still be in for another 4 years, so isnt it the responsibility of Trump to ensure the vaccine for his own people?

Biden has no power right now, how can he be held accountable?

Have you a video of him saying that also? or a link, you normally have a twitter link at least

People better watch the health minister of Wyoming since he spent his life in society Russia and should know he says it is an obnoxiously obvious biological weapon and says not to take it for any reason if you're stupid enough to put crap in your body even if it were a vaccine against a 99.8% recovery problem. You're more lucky to die of the common cold for God's sake.

a reply to: angelchemuel

It is fantastic news about the MHRAs approval of the vaccine. Some one 'proper' says its good to go, which is mega!

Thinking back , the UK bought 50 Million masks for Health Service use, that were the kicked into touch by the British Safety Federation as being useless.

So this "hasty" (to quote the EU dtugs watch dog) approval by the MHRA is useful both in deflecting the finger pointing if it doesn't work (like the masks), and gives the UK a glimmer of light just before the full lock down ends and Christmas kicks off, timing being everything etc.

Given we now have acess to an approved vaccine, I am a bit puzzled as to why the Government feels the need to have options on 350 Million doses of vaccine across a number of global companies (not the Chinese one though, that would be too James Bond!).
Any ideas?

Still its great this one has been basically fixed in time for Christmas just like Boris said!

Is the point of the OP that China who many claim started this, haven’t got a vaccine and nothing to do with the vaccine.

My thoughts on the OP.

It did start in China at the wet market, how they are picking it up elsewhere in sewage much early is either a mistake or contamination.

Or it was an accidental release from a lab.

Therefore, they did not do it on purpose or they would have a vaccine.

Of course, they seem to have it under control, how do we know they haven’t vaccinated everyone.

Some bad news today, Terry’s father is gravely ill. The good news is that the Doctor says he should make it through the next few weeks which should be enough time for him to make it onto the vaccine list!

a reply to: Doxanoxa

You might want to have a look at this video.
The MHRA are supposedly a Government funded body.....but are they.


Here's the full link in case that doesn't work because there is more than one =

www.youtube.com... en

Rainbows
Jane

Any human rights activists or lawyers on ATS?

How does the covid vaccine from Pfizer work with everyone's right to choose

article 8 of human rights

To be valid, consent must be informed. So if a patient consents to treatment on the basis of misleading information, or where information was withheld from them, it could be argued that treatment breached Article 8. This doesn’t mean that doctors must tell patients about every possible complication of the treatment, but they must be able to show that they have taken into account the patient’s Article 8 rights and be able to justify withholding information.

Medical consent

If the NHS or gov health ministers arent aware of the side effects or potential side effects how can they reasonably say they considered everyones rights

if the information on the side effects are unknown then how can this be justifiable
the government and health ministers surely were information has been withheld ,either because its unknown or its a trade secret

None of the vaccines for Covid have been tested to any great degree.
The reason Pfizer is allowed to release their vaccine is that the UK Gave them indemnity from prosecution should anything go wrong. Pfizer has been given protection from legal action by UK government.

Pfizer seems to have made a few shortcuts. They appear to have skipped the caged Ape trials and gone straight to humans.
Take this vaccine at your own risk.

a reply to: sapien82
And why would they be busy recruiting AI specialists to monitor the reactions people might have? Surely some savvy IT guys would be OK....why AI? Gates got his way with a microchip in it?
AI to track vaccine

Rainbows
Jane