|
Is a pig that does Karate a pork chop?
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure, but they do like to ham it up while practicing Ba-Con-Do.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
Is Barbie into Ken-Do?
If a developer learns Kung Fu does he need to learn Kung Bar as well?
Is karate a Canadians response to “What vegetable are you eating?”
Is it Gentile Jitsu when you aren’t fighting the guy in a yarmulke?
If you can't laugh at yourself - ask me and I will do it for you.
|
|
|
|
|
Are their airiel kicks described as swine flu?
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
When a pig needs money, does it hock its ham?
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like a monday morning.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Did you find out your answer?
|
|
|
|
|
AstraZeneca's vaccine, with all of it's improved stability and ease of handling, just found out something they hadn't expected. The US regulators who grant EUA (Emergency Use Authorization) are not simply there to rubber-stamp through any vaccine that's submitted to them. They are seriously looking into them.
AstraZeneca supplied outdated data, potentially data that skews its efficacy and thus improve its chances of getting the EUA for the US. I, personally, would like to get the latest data on the efficacy for older persons (which was or is still problematic).
The good news: more confidence that US regulators aren't rubber-stamping this stuff through.
The bad news: less trust than before* in the AstraZeneca vaccine - especially with three alternatives available (here).
One of many articles[^]
* bad reports w.r.t. effectiveness on the elderly just 'disappeared' from the news
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Not surprising; where's there's money to be made there is sure to be corruption!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alas, so true.
Interestingly, I often squeeze the truest version of the news out of the business sections. Politics causes skewing of reality but even politics is driven, ultimately, by money.
The business point of view of the various articles is not so much about the efficacy of the drug as how it hurt the stock because doubts where cast (and thus the why's).
Look on the bright side: we're not being offered Sputnik V or Sinovac
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Thankfully we had the Pfizer vaccine.
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
AstraZeneca has a 79% efficacy rate as apposed to Pfizer 95%+ efficacy rate. That rate drops as age increases over 65. do the math. AstraZeneca sucks.
I got my first Pfizer shot 3/14. Getting the second one next week.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, it's the 79% that's being questioned. The age data magically disappeared from the public discourse. (So did blood type related and info w.r.t. serious results if you get COVID).
The important part . . . if it's true . . . is protection from serious illness. I wasn't worried about catching COVID so much as being hospitalized and/or dying because of it. They claim it's 100% effective for that. Their claims, however, have just gotten a kick in the nuts.
My Pfizer second shot plus two weeks happened yesterday. Shopping without gloves, taking mail in and opening it the same day, and for the shopping, not sanitizing all the food. Mrs. Wife actually went to a restaurant with a friend (she had Moderna a week earlier to start so we graduated together).
Irony: Oxford/AstraZeneca had a major head start over all the other vaccines (the Oxford part). Lesson learned: the new technology, mRNA, is going to be amazingly important because of both flexibility and development speed. And not containing any infectious vectors, dead or weakened.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
And the latest report shows that it may be no more effective than the single shot Johnson vaccine.
|
|
|
|
|
So less effective then. But.... still better than nothing, eh?
|
|
|
|
|
Absolutely yes - better than nothing.
The choice, at least in the US, however is not 'nothing'. There are three other options.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Is it possible to have more than one?
|
|
|
|
|
I presume you're referring to the potential for boosters. Currently that's under discussion and research. It has been hypothesized that, at least in terms of a booster, a different vaccine may be a better choice as it will broaden the immunity not only as a booster but because it's just somewhat different. Still, however, a question.
Other uses for your post:
"Cuando tengo mas de uno" - the catch-phrase, many years ago, for Schaffer Beer: "When you're having more than one". English[^] Español[^]
Or, if you're an immortal . . . there can be only one.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rather than pick "one of many articles", why not look at actual data. The UK has now performed about 28 million vaccinations, (including over 2 million 2nd doses), with pretty much, a 50:50 split between Pfizer and AstraZeneca. And the UK Government, make a whole lot of data publicly available including efficacy. Link provided below.
There are a lot of figures in the report but, my reading of it, is that there is little to choose between the two vaccines. I'm not going to extract any of the report here, because I could show numbers which favour Pfizer or AstraZeneca or show both to be the same.
If AstraZeneca jumped the gun, in going public with interim figures, then that was naive. But that does not make it a bad, (or even lesser) vaccine. It just means they are not handling their PR very well. And, in fact, the 'one of many articles' that you link to, actually quotes Dr Fauci: "This is likely a very good vaccine".
Also, AstraZeneca is not profiting from this vaccine, so the only people who gain from the unwarranted scare tactics are it's competitors - who are making huge profits.
So, if anyone wants to look at actual data, try here: Public Health England vaccine effectiveness report[^]
|
|
|
|
|
You wasted a lot of text when the reality is quite clear:
1 - the data submitted was outdated and that was no ones fault but A-Z's
Quoting Fauci: the key is "very likely" - as in we need to see the ![Elephant | [mastadon]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/elephant.gif) ing latest data!
Stats from the UK government - as though they are more credible then those released by A-Z? You forgot to check the joke-icon selector when you posted this reply.
As for "no profit" - I've seen how businesses count their money - what are there expenses, etc. I've seen hugely profitable companies accounting methods somehow turn themselves into money losers.
Make me think about how the EU was so suppertime of getting vaccines distributed to the poorer nations. Then, of course, came the export controls (bans). Words are cheap.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos, GHB wrote: Stats from the UK government - as though they are more credible then those released by A-Z?
Looking at the outcome of 28 million vaccinations has to be more credible, (and more accurate), than looking at any trial. There is no reason why the UK Government would be anything other than factual - particularly as, lying would be a far riskier approach. And, when presented with actual data collected after 28 million vaccinations, (by the UK Government) versus the press looking to stir up another sh*t-storm, I know which I'm going to choose. Also, no-one is saying that the AstraZeneca results are wrong - just too early. So far, every claim made, (mostly by the EU), that the AstraZeneca vaccine is ineffective/unsafe has been proven to be completely wrong. Their credibility has been damaged by politicians and the press. Not by the quality of their vaccine.
W∴ Balboos, GHB wrote: Make me think about how the EU was so suppertime of getting vaccines distributed to the poorer nations. Then, of course, came the export controls (bans). Words are cheap.
The UK is not part of the EU. The EU, (who, incorrectly, accused both the UK & US of export bans), hasn't actually enforced an export ban - yet! Yes they are talking about it and, yes, Italy unilaterally withheld an export to Australia - but I don't think they count as a 'poorer nation'. The UK funded the development of the AstraZeneca vaccine; has no export bans; has not even suggested export bans; and, in fact, it is already being used in 70 countries.
And, no, I have no vested interest in AstraZeneca. Just the facts! 
|
|
|
|
|
5teveH wrote: has no export bans; has not even suggested export bans
No need to if it is in the contract with AZ. Smart, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
