Jump to content

~*Official #COVID-19 Thread of Doom*~ Revenge of Omicron Prime


Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Joe said:

 

 

Compliance must be unbelievably terrible for him to say something like this.

 

Massachusetts has a $500 fine in place of you break quarantine after coming in from out of state. Ask me how many people I know that have vacationed in like Florida and then went on as if there was no such thing? Nobody is taking these quarantines seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Joe said:

 

 

Compliance must be unbelievably terrible for him to say something like this.

 

So, basically: 14-days is better and should probably still be the standard, but no one's currently listening, so if we drop it to 7-10 days maybe people will listen.

...is that the jist?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Spork3245 said:

 

So, basically: 14-days is better and should probably still be the standard, but no one's currently listening, so if we drop it to 7-10 days maybe people will listen.

...is that the jist?

 

Basically lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Spork3245 said:

 

So, basically: 14-days is better and should probably still be the standard, but no one's currently listening, so if we drop it to 7-10 days maybe people will listen.

...is that the jist?

 

 

Yup

 

At this point the virus is so widespread you wonder if a 14 day quarantine for contact with a positive person might not be a de facto shutdown....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CitizenVectron said:

In Canada, Trudeau mentioned that while Canada had many orders in with different vaccine suppliers, countries that manufacture the vaccine will likely get quicker access (by diverting initial batches internally). The Conservatives (and conservative Premiers) have twisted this into "Why is Canada at the back of the line for vaccines? Don't these companies know who we are?!" 

  1. Canada is firmly a lower-middle power. While we punch above our weight financially due to being a developed first world nation, we are still small.
  2. We have no internal vaccine research or manufacturing industry

We were slower than other countries (UK, US, EU) to sign up with Pfizer -- it has nothing to do with "who we are".  WE JUST DIDN'T PRIORITIZE IT.  Instead, we focused on a partnership with a Chinese company (CanSino), and were surprised when the Chinese government put a stop to the vaccine development program.

1)  We are about 2/3 the size of the UK, which is the first western country to get a vaccine 

2)  We do have vaccine research and manufacturing in Canada -- is it significantly underdeveloped?  Absolutely.  However, vaccines are developed and produced in Canada every year.  There are in fact 6 vaccine Canadian vaccine candidates registered with the WHO (including one in Saskatchewan!), including at least 2 that are in the process of going through human trials.  We do, however, have no capability to produce/develop RNA vaccines -- but neither does the UK.

The Conservatives are full of hyperbole too -- claiming we are "at the back of the line" -- which is also horseshit.

3 hours ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

So why would we be the first? Having said that, Moderna has since come out and said (likely at the behest of the government) that Canada will be getting some of the first batch due to placing one of the first pre-orders. So likely the US, UK, and Germany will have initial doses in December, and Canada will get some in January. 

 

Focusing on just the G7.  The UK and US are planning on immunizing their high priority groups in the winter, and launching their widespread vaccination programs in the spring. (I believe the EU is working on similar timing, but I haven't seen a timeline for them yet).  Canada hopes to vaccinate the high priority groups in the winter/spring and widespread vaccination in summer/fall. (I think this is largely in line with Japan). Again, the UK should have more doses in December (>10 million) than Canada hopes to have in March.  Of course, because Trudeau is keeping to his speaking points, and trying to avoid giving much in the terms of facts/timing -- I have had to interpret his comments somewhat.

3 hours ago, CitizenVectron said:

It's crazy how every single thing about this is being politicized. What makes me the most upset is that the Premiers are in charge of handling the pandemic (and are failing), but the federal government is the one bailing them all out (through stimulus, emergency relief for workers, etc), and now they just complain. You are saving us but only at 98% efficiency, we need 100% or otherwise you are a failure, why do you hate Canada, Mister Prime Minister?

We don't have any fiscal capability to run the kind of ridiculous programs we had before.  Given how long this pandemic was anticipated lasting, spending a smaller amount spread over a longer time would have been more prudent.  Because they all know we can't have the programs, everyone is looking for someone else to blame.

spacer.png

 

Given the relative difficulty the provinces have in generating revenue relative to their spending responsibilities, they're always going to blame the federal government for not funding things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Joe said:

 

The sad part is this might actually improve things do to improved compliance.

 

Yeah, I am in favor of stringent guidelines and the CDC has done stuff to make me skeptical of them, but this seems like a reasonable triage move in a country that is suffering crippling pandemic fatigue.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

We were slower than other countries (UK, US, EU) to sign up with Pfizer -- it has nothing to do with "who we are".  WE JUST DIDN'T PRIORITIZE IT. 

 

And we were one of the first with Moderna, while some countries like France won't be even approving that vaccine until next spring. 

 

7 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

 

 

 

Instead, we focused on a partnership with a Chinese company (CanSino), and were surprised when the Chinese government put a stop to the vaccine development program.

1)  We are about 2/3 the size of the UK, which is the first western country to get a vaccine 

 

Are you referring to the Oxford vaccine that will likely need new trials because they boofed the Phase III trials?

 

7 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

2)  We do have vaccine research and manufacturing in Canada -- is it significantly underdeveloped?  Absolutely.  However, vaccines are developed and produced in Canada every year.  There are in fact 6 vaccine Canadian vaccine candidates registered with the WHO (including one in Saskatchewan!), including at least 2 that are in the process of going through human trials.  We do, however, have no capability to produce/develop RNA vaccines -- but neither does the UK.

The Conservatives are full of hyperbole too -- claiming we are "at the back of the line" -- which is also horseshit.

 

Sorry I should have been more clear, I was referring to the mRNA vaccines, which are cutting-edge and for which we have no capability.

 

7 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

 

Focusing on just the G7.  The UK and US are planning on immunizing their high priority groups in the winter, and launching their widespread vaccination programs in the spring. (I believe the EU is working on similar timing, but I haven't seen a timeline for them yet).  Canada hopes to vaccinate the high priority groups in the winter/spring and widespread vaccination in summer/fall. (I think this is largely in line with Japan). Again, the UK should have more doses in December (>10 million) than Canada hopes to have in March.  Of course, because Trudeau is keeping to his speaking points, and trying to avoid giving much in the terms of facts/timing -- I have had to interpret his comments somewhat.

 

So in other words, we will be near the front, but not at the same pace as the US/UK. 

 

7 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

We don't have any fiscal capability to run the kind of ridiculous programs we had before.  Given how long this pandemic was anticipated lasting, spending a smaller amount spread over a longer time would have been more prudent.  Because they all know we can't have the programs, everyone is looking for someone else to blame.

spacer.png

 

Given the relative difficulty the provinces have in generating revenue relative to their spending responsibilities, they're always going to blame the federal government for not funding things.

 

The reason we spent so much, however, is because Canada had the most robust assistance plans for businesses and people in the world. Sure it could have been scaled back, but then more people would have been negatively affected. It's a trade-off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

And we were one of the first with Moderna, while some countries like France won't be even approving that vaccine until next spring. 

 

 

Are you referring to the Oxford vaccine that will likely need new trials because they boofed the Phase III trials?

 

 

Sorry I should have been more clear, I was referring to the mRNA vaccines, which are cutting-edge and for which we have no capability.

 

 

So in other words, we will be near the front, but not at the same pace as the US/UK. 

 

 

The reason we spent so much, however, is because Canada had the most robust assistance plans for businesses and people in the world. Sure it could have been scaled back, but then more people would have been negatively affected. It's a trade-off.

 

I believe the UK is set to get the Pfizer vaccine next week already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CitizenVectron said:

 

And we were one of the first with Moderna, while some countries like France won't be even approving that vaccine until next spring. 

Macron has announced that he expects mass vaccination to take place in France between April and June -- and vaccination to be available in 2020 [although, I can't see how any can be administered, as the EU Medicines agency isn't planning on approving/rejecting it until Dec. 29].  Trudeau, by comparison, has said he expects the majority of Canadians (i.e. somewhere between 51%-100%) to be vaccinated by September -- and vaccination to begin in early 2021.

Just now, CitizenVectron said:

Are you referring to the Oxford vaccine that will likely need new trials because they boofed the Phase III trials?

No.  The Pfizer vaccine, which will begin roll-out in the UK next week.

Just now, CitizenVectron said:

So in other words, we will be near the front, but not at the same pace as the US/UK. 

 

Also, behind the EU.  Compared to our peer group (the G7), we are near the back.

 

20 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

Sorry I should have been more clear, I was referring to the mRNA vaccines, which are cutting-edge and for which we have no capability.

It would be surprising if Canada had capability in RNA vaccines.  Before today, there has never been an RNA vaccine approved for use.  That is why Pfizer partnered with BioNTech.  Before Covid, most of the mainstream pharmaceuticals had abandoned RNA vaccine research as not being financially viable.  Not having the capability in RNA vaccines did not stop the UK from being the first country to begin a vaccination program with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This vaccine development is certainly exciting news, especially with the stated 95% effectiveness, but it makes me wonder how all this is done exactly. Not to sound like a conspiracy theorist, or anti vaxxer, but how exactly is testing done in order to make sure that a vaccine is effective, lasts, and doesn't have any negative side effects, like giving you cancer in 20 years? Again, I'm not trying to sound like an anti vaxxer (get your fucking shots!), I'm wondering from a genuine sense of curiosity of what the vaccine development process is like for any vaccine. Anyone have any knowledge of this kind of stuff? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Brick said:

This vaccine development is certainly exciting news, especially with the stated 95% effectiveness, but it makes me wonder how all this is done exactly. Not to sound like a conspiracy theorist, or anti vaxxer, but how exactly is testing done in order to make sure that a vaccine is effective, lasts, and doesn't have any negative side effects, like giving you cancer in 20 years? Again, I'm not trying to sound like an anti vaxxer (get your fucking shots!), I'm wondering from a genuine sense of curiosity of what the vaccine development process is like for any vaccine. Anyone have any knowledge of this kind of stuff? 

I am certainly not an expert.  However, vaccines work by injecting an "antigen" into the body, essentially something that appears to be like the virus you are vaccinating against, that trains the immune system to  fight the real virus.  They go through clinical trials to ensure that they are effective, and have minimal side effects.  (i.e. they have groups of tens of thousands of people that are given the vaccine, and another similar group that are given a placebo shot).  Given how vaccines work, side effects typically show up very early on.  

 

Currently, there is no way of knowing how long the Covid-19 vaccination lasts.  It may last months, it may last years.  Given that the folks in the Phase 3 trials have only had the vaccine for a few months -- we know it provides some level of protection for that amount of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, marioandsonic said:

So, remember how I stopped going to my nearby gym a couple weeks ago when Covid cases were spiking? Well, my gym sent out an email stating that at least 2 of their members have recently tested positive for Covid.

 

I think I dodged a bullet there.

 

 

Feel the burn....in your lungs!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Brick said:

This vaccine development is certainly exciting news, especially with the stated 95% effectiveness, but it makes me wonder how all this is done exactly. Not to sound like a conspiracy theorist, or anti vaxxer, but how exactly is testing done in order to make sure that a vaccine is effective, lasts, and doesn't have any negative side effects, like giving you cancer in 20 years? Again, I'm not trying to sound like an anti vaxxer (get your fucking shots!), I'm wondering from a genuine sense of curiosity of what the vaccine development process is like for any vaccine. Anyone have any knowledge of this kind of stuff? 

From my understanding it's not terribly sophisticated, at least in the design of the trials. They get a big group of people, give half the vaccine, and track them for the length of the trial. The 95% number comes from comparing the control group's infection rate to those that got the real thing. It's not exactly ethical to purposefully expose vaccinated people to the virus.

 

While they're monitoring people, they investigate any reported illnesses. Obviously people are going to get sick, but they do their best to make sure the illnesses aren't caused by the vaccine itself. The Oxford vaccine is an example of a case where there were some people that fell ill and they couldn't figure out if it was the vaccine or not, so they are going to re-do the trial.

 

When it comes to the long term effects, the best data comes from other similar vaccines. So, if you create a new attenuated vaccine, we have a pretty good idea of what the potential long term effects (or lack thereof), because we've been using them for a long time.

 

With the Covid vaccines the long term effects are slightly less well known. As far as I know they all are one of two types: mRNA and genetically engineered adenovirus-based. There are no current vaccines of either type that have been approved for use in the US, but both have been studied for decades now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My job had me at a Hospital that is currently maxed out. No checks at the front door, no limited visitors , in fact the lady at the front door wasnt even wearing a mask. Anyone wanna take a guess as to why i was there?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adding code blues to make shift patient rooms because they are over run with covid patients.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, SimpleG said:

My job had me at a Hospital that is currently maxed out. No checks at the front door, no limited visitors , in fact the lady at the front door wasnt even wearing a mask. Anyone wanna take a guess as to why i was there?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adding code blues to make shift patient rooms because they are over run with covid patients.

Crazy. Here they check your temp and all sorts of shit just to walk in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SimpleG said:

My job had me at a Hospital that is currently maxed out. No checks at the front door, no limited visitors , in fact the lady at the front door wasnt even wearing a mask. Anyone wanna take a guess as to why i was there?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adding code blues to make shift patient rooms because they are over run with covid patients.

 

Where?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...