UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,681
Default Conundrum

top-posted for Brian

We had invitations yesterday to book second doses of Pfizer. That was 9
weeks after out first. First available slot was 16 April. If - big if
- that's typical then it gives plenty of time to arrange a companion.


On 04/04/2021 15:49, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Gaff \(Sofa\) wrote:
I also remember them saying that they had, for a few weeks to administer
2nd doses to avoid people going over the time limit, so surely this
change in priority is expected until they catch up a bit. Mine is due
toward the end of this month first week of next so we shall see if they
meet that with the second dose. I have pointed out to them that I'd
need a weeks warning to find a person to bring me to keep social
distancing.


All my (old) friends who had the vaccine early on due to age etc have
either had or have a date for the second one.



--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid
  #42   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,080
Default Conundrum

On 04/04/2021 15:49, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Gaff \(Sofa\) wrote:
I also remember them saying that they had, for a few weeks to administer
2nd doses to avoid people going over the time limit, so surely this
change in priority is expected until they catch up a bit. Mine is due
toward the end of this month first week of next so we shall see if they
meet that with the second dose. I have pointed out to them that I'd
need a weeks warning to find a person to bring me to keep social
distancing.


All my (old) friends who had the vaccine early on due to age etc have
either had or have a date for the second one.


My parents (in their 80s) have recently had their second jabs (they were
sent letters to book them). My wife (medically vulnerable) has recently
had a letter and is booked for her second jab in a couple of weeks. I
(54) had a letter a month ago, which let me book both appointments (last
Thursday and 17th June) at the same time, so I won't have to wait for a
second letter.

  #43   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 40,893
Default Conundrum



"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 03/04/2021 08:32, Andy Burns wrote:
jon wrote:

Alexa News report: second jabs outnumber first jabs.


Fully expected, you can see the cumulative and daily first/second rates
here

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations

As near as buggerit 60% of adults have had 1st plus 10% have had 2nd, the
2nd doses now have to follow the pattern 3 months behind the 1st doses,
and the less vulnerable under 50s will get 1st doses at a slower rate.

Whoever decided on the change from 3 weeks between doses to 3 months has
turned out to be ABSOLUTELY right ...


There were many articles at the time said that the industry standard for
max effect was a delay of 12 weeks. 12 weeks being the gold standard due
to the way our immune system works


But that wasnt how the phase 3 trial was done.

And its the time for the Pfizer.

And that the 3 weeks delay in trials was for expediency to get the vaccine
regulatory approval some 2 months earlier than otherwise if a 12 week
delay had been used.


In fact they were both approved at the same time.

  #44   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,120
Default Conundrum

On Sat, 03 Apr 2021 08:37:02 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:

Obviously faulty data then.


No, he means on a single day, not total since december.

yesterday first doses = 153,823
second doses = 435,177

A couple of weeks ago it was
first doses = 752,308
second doses = 91,977

So fewer doses total, but we were warned of a dip in supply.


Oh, fewer eh? Posh ****.
  #45   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,655
Default Conundrum

On 04/04/2021 19:49, Tim Streater wrote:
On 04 Apr 2021 at 19:06:45 BST, "Commander Kinsey" wrote:
On Sat, 03 Apr 2021 08:37:02 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:
So fewer doses total, but we were warned of a dip in supply.


Oh, fewer eh? Posh ****.


As opposed to what, O wise one?

Our 'erudite' friend would likely use _less_.


  #46   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 566
Default Conundrum



"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
On 04 Apr 2021 at 19:06:45 BST, "Commander Kinsey" wrote:

On Sat, 03 Apr 2021 08:37:02 +0100, Andy Burns
wrote:

Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:

Obviously faulty data then.

No, he means on a single day, not total since december.

yesterday first doses = 153,823
second doses = 435,177 A couple of weeks ago it was
first doses = 752,308
second doses = 91,977 So fewer doses total, but we were warned of a dip
in supply.


Oh, fewer eh? Posh ****.


As opposed to what, O wise one?


He's sniping about the use of that word.

  #47   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,655
Default Conundrum

On 04/04/2021 22:18, Tim Streater wrote:
On 04 Apr 2021 at 20:19:03 BST, S Viemeister
wrote:

On 04/04/2021 19:49, Tim Streater wrote:
On 04 Apr 2021 at 19:06:45 BST, "Commander Kinsey" wrote:
On Sat, 03 Apr 2021 08:37:02 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:
So fewer doses total, but we were warned of a dip in supply.

Oh, fewer eh? Posh ****.

As opposed to what, O wise one?

Our 'erudite' friend would likely use _less_.


Then he's a fathead.

Well, yes.
  #48   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,829
Default Conundrum

Dave Plowman wrote:

John Rumm wrote:

Andrew wrote:

some of recipients of Jab/Jag #1 have died of blood clots ?


as have a number who did not receive Jab #1


Seems strange on a DIY group where people are presumably used to measuring
things that they seem incapable of understanding simple statistics?


I'm not female, I'm not on the pill, I don't smoke ... so I took my
chances ...


  #49   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,829
Default Conundrum

Dave Plowman wrote:

All my (old) friends who had the vaccine early on due to age etc have
either had or have a date for the second one.


It wouldn't let me complete booking for 1st jab without booking 2nd at
same time. 1st was had in Leicester, but no appointments there for the
2nd, so I'll go to Tamworth for that in June.

  #50   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,120
Default Conundrum

On Sun, 04 Apr 2021 22:18:49 +0100, Tim Streater wrote:

On 04 Apr 2021 at 20:19:03 BST, S Viemeister
wrote:

On 04/04/2021 19:49, Tim Streater wrote:
On 04 Apr 2021 at 19:06:45 BST, "Commander Kinsey" wrote:
On Sat, 03 Apr 2021 08:37:02 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:
So fewer doses total, but we were warned of a dip in supply.

Oh, fewer eh? Posh ****.

As opposed to what, O wise one?

Our 'erudite' friend would likely use _less_.


Then he's a fathead.


No, I'm logical. The words mean the same thing. Avoid duplication.


  #51   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Conundrum

In article ,
Andy Burns wrote:
Dave Plowman wrote:


John Rumm wrote:

Andrew wrote:

some of recipients of Jab/Jag #1 have died of blood clots ?

as have a number who did not receive Jab #1


Seems strange on a DIY group where people are presumably used to
measuring things that they seem incapable of understanding simple
statistics?


I'm not female, I'm not on the pill, I don't smoke ... so I took my
chances ...


Which means you must think the risks from a vaccine greater than catching
Covid. How did you arrive at this conclusion? You'd need some pretty
specialist knowledge do it with any accuracy.

--
*IF A PARSLEY FARMER IS SUED, CAN THEY GARNISH HIS WAGES?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #52   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Conundrum

In article ,
Andy Burns wrote:
Dave Plowman wrote:


All my (old) friends who had the vaccine early on due to age etc have
either had or have a date for the second one.


It wouldn't let me complete booking for 1st jab without booking 2nd at
same time. 1st was had in Leicester, but no appointments there for the
2nd, so I'll go to Tamworth for that in June.


Round here, it was your GP who arranged the vaccine for us oldies and
vulnerable. With the second one not always given a date for. Online
booking seem to give both.

--
*Fax is stronger than fiction *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #53   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,061
Default Conundrum

In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andy Burns wrote:
Dave Plowman wrote:


All my (old) friends who had the vaccine early on due to age etc have
either had or have a date for the second one.


It wouldn't let me complete booking for 1st jab without booking 2nd at
same time. 1st was had in Leicester, but no appointments there for the
2nd, so I'll go to Tamworth for that in June.


Round here, it was your GP who arranged the vaccine for us oldies and
vulnerable. With the second one not always given a date for. Online
booking seem to give both.


I've got my 2nd one booked (in 12 days time) at the same as the first via
NHS/bookacorronavirusvaccation. SWMBO, whose was arranged via her GP only 3
days after mine hasn'yt yet got a 2nd appointment.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
  #54   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,431
Default Conundrum

On Tue, 06 Apr 2021 11:19:04 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

snip

Seems strange on a DIY group where people are presumably used to
measuring things that they seem incapable of understanding simple
statistics?


I'm not female, I'm not on the pill, I don't smoke ... so I took my
chances ...


Which means you must think the risks from a vaccine greater than catching
Covid. How did you arrive at this conclusion? You'd need some pretty
specialist knowledge do it with any accuracy.


Isn't the comparison (for the individual) more between any potential
risk from any vaccine versus the risk of any *illness / death*
resulting from catching something that the vaccine may have prevented,
not actually catching Covid19 (in this case) itself?

The extension of that would be any advantages re herd immunity, if
there was such from the vaccine (not the case with the Covid19
vaccines as I understand it)?

Eg, Whilst I understand on a few hundred otherwise healthy youngsters
have died from Covid19, there is a very good chance many have carried
and passed it onto their parents or grandparents who have died.

If the vaccine prevented them from carrying the virus
(asymptomatically especially) then it would make sense to vaccinate
them, but again, I don't believe it's the case (meaning social
distancing between them and their parents / grandparents is the safest
bet and let them get herd immunity 'naturally' and so no risks from
the vaccine)?

Cheers, T i m
  #55   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,431
Default Conundrum

On Mon, 5 Apr 2021 17:13:41 +0100, Andy Burns
wrote:

Dave Plowman wrote:

All my (old) friends who had the vaccine early on due to age etc have
either had or have a date for the second one.


It wouldn't let me complete booking for 1st jab without booking 2nd at
same time. 1st was had in Leicester, but no appointments there for the
2nd, so I'll go to Tamworth for that in June.


As I was booking mine online, by the time I'd chosen the date and time
for the second, the first had been allocated to someone else. ;-)

So I went back and chose the first date to be at a better time (for
me) a couple more days on and chose the second date (now later as
well) at a later time (than the earliest available) to up the odds.
;-)

Whack-a-mole vaccine booking. ;-)

Cheers, T i m


  #56   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,080
Default Conundrum

On 06/04/2021 11:21, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andy Burns wrote:
Dave Plowman wrote:


All my (old) friends who had the vaccine early on due to age etc have
either had or have a date for the second one.


It wouldn't let me complete booking for 1st jab without booking 2nd at
same time. 1st was had in Leicester, but no appointments there for the
2nd, so I'll go to Tamworth for that in June.


Round here, it was your GP who arranged the vaccine for us oldies and
vulnerable. With the second one not always given a date for. Online
booking seem to give both.


There are still two separate systems running. The central NHS system and
your local GPs.

Recently I received an NHS letter (54, with a slightly increased risk
due to a medical condition) and booked both appointments online. A week
or two later, I received a text from my GP, offering appointments, with
a link to book and the option to reject, which then brought up further
options for reasons for rejecting, where I selected "Already booked
appointments" or something similar.

  #57   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,829
Default Conundrum

Dave Plowman wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

I'm not female, I'm not on the pill, I don't smoke ... so I took my
chances ...


Which means you must think the risks from a vaccine greater than catching
Covid.


No, it means I'm not in the groups that start with a higher blood-clot
risk, which the az vaccine may (or may not) exacerbate, therefore I
didn't let a factor which is trivial for me as an individual, deter me
from getting the vaccine.

How did you arrive at this conclusion?
You'd need some pretty
specialist knowledge do it with any accuracy.


  #58   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,829
Default Conundrum

T i m wrote:

Whilst I understand on a few hundred otherwise healthy youngsters
have died from Covid19, there is a very good chance many have carried
and passed it onto their parents or grandparents who have died.


Looking at the demographics (which only seem to be available for
England, not the UK as whole, or for the other nations individually)

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases?areaType=nation%26areaName=England#card-cases_by_specimen_date_age_demographics

It seems the people most likely to test positive at the moment are 10-14
year olds, so highly likely related to the return to school, though
possibly also the less accurate results from LFD compared to PCR tests.

You can also see the Oct/Nov surge started in 15-24 year olds, so likely
related to return to university.

Those above retirement age, or below school age are now the least likely
within society to catch covid, though it may well still be more serious
for them if they do.


  #59   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,431
Default Conundrum

On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 13:30:04 +0100, Andy Burns
wrote:

snip

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases?areaType=nation%26areaName=England#card-cases_by_specimen_date_age_demographics

It seems the people most likely to test positive at the moment are 10-14
year olds, so highly likely related to the return to school, though
possibly also the less accurate results from LFD compared to PCR tests.


And because of a planned dog_walk_to_Toolstation and back (~6 miles)
was 'modified' by some park groundworks, we had to deviate past a
secondary school at emptying out time and we felt like salmon swimming
up a Covid stream.[1] ;-(

You can also see the Oct/Nov surge started in 15-24 year olds, so likely
related to return to university.


Yeah.

Those above retirement age, or below school age are now the least likely
within society to catch covid, though it may well still be more serious
for them if they do.

Something I'm feeling slightly more comfortable about after having the
jab (or jabs in her case), for both us and my Mum (now 91).

Cheers, T i m

[1] What helped slightly us because we had the dog with us and a large
percentage of the kids were black (many of whom seem to have an issue
with dogs [2]), the dog acted a bit like a snowplough, clearing a path
for us. ;-)

[2] This was previously demonstrated when approaching a fair sized
group of mostly black school lads spread across the pavement outside a
chicken shop. As we approached with the dog in front and about to step
into the access road to walk around them, one spotted the dog, shouted
'Dog!' and the majority instantly ran in different directions like a
starburst firework going off! The couple that were left joined us in
the grinning ...

And it's only a mid sized terrier, not a wolf! ;-)
  #60   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Conundrum

In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Tue, 06 Apr 2021 11:19:04 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:


snip


Seems strange on a DIY group where people are presumably used to
measuring things that they seem incapable of understanding simple
statistics?


I'm not female, I'm not on the pill, I don't smoke ... so I took my
chances ...


Which means you must think the risks from a vaccine greater than catching
Covid. How did you arrive at this conclusion? You'd need some pretty
specialist knowledge do it with any accuracy.


Isn't the comparison (for the individual) more between any potential
risk from any vaccine versus the risk of any *illness / death*
resulting from catching something that the vaccine may have prevented,
not actually catching Covid19 (in this case) itself?


Of course. By catching Covid, I'm assuming you'd know this by the
symptoms. Until we have exhaustive regular testing, we're not going to
know how many have it but have no symptoms. Whereas we do have figures for
those with symptoms bad enough to go to a doctor. And we also have figures
for any reactions to the vaccine - to date. Obviously long term side
effects from either will have to wait for time to pass.

The extension of that would be any advantages re herd immunity, if
there was such from the vaccine (not the case with the Covid19
vaccines as I understand it)?


Herd immunity generally means letting the weak die and the strong survive.
Maybe OK in the wild, but with mankind and civilisation the 'brain' can be
more important than 'muscle', as it were.

Eg, Whilst I understand on a few hundred otherwise healthy youngsters
have died from Covid19, there is a very good chance many have carried
and passed it onto their parents or grandparents who have died.


Yes - even more so where generations tend to live together.

If the vaccine prevented them from carrying the virus
(asymptomatically especially) then it would make sense to vaccinate
them, but again, I don't believe it's the case (meaning social
distancing between them and their parents / grandparents is the safest
bet and let them get herd immunity 'naturally' and so no risks from
the vaccine)?


The normal way with vaccines is to immunise (near) everyone. So the virus
doesn't get transmitted and dies out. Not of course for ever. But that was
the theory with other vaccinations.

Cheers, T i m


--
*I'm really easy to get along with once people learn to worship me

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.


  #61   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Conundrum

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
On 06/04/2021 11:21, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andy Burns wrote:
Dave Plowman wrote:


All my (old) friends who had the vaccine early on due to age etc have
either had or have a date for the second one.


It wouldn't let me complete booking for 1st jab without booking 2nd at
same time. 1st was had in Leicester, but no appointments there for the
2nd, so I'll go to Tamworth for that in June.


Round here, it was your GP who arranged the vaccine for us oldies and
vulnerable. With the second one not always given a date for. Online
booking seem to give both.


There are still two separate systems running. The central NHS system and
your local GPs.


Yes - although doesn't appear to be the case natiowide.

Recently I received an NHS letter (54, with a slightly increased risk
due to a medical condition) and booked both appointments online. A week
or two later, I received a text from my GP, offering appointments, with
a link to book and the option to reject, which then brought up further
options for reasons for rejecting, where I selected "Already booked
appointments" or something similar.


I had my NHS letter some time after my GP had arranged (and I'd had) my
first jab.

--
*Everybody lies, but it doesn't matter since nobody listens*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #62   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Conundrum

In article ,
Andy Burns wrote:
T i m wrote:


Whilst I understand on a few hundred otherwise healthy youngsters
have died from Covid19, there is a very good chance many have carried
and passed it onto their parents or grandparents who have died.


Looking at the demographics (which only seem to be available for
England, not the UK as whole, or for the other nations individually)


https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases?areaType=nation%26areaName=England#card-cases_by_specimen_date_age_demographics


It seems the people most likely to test positive at the moment are 10-14
year olds, so highly likely related to the return to school, though
possibly also the less accurate results from LFD compared to PCR tests.


You can also see the Oct/Nov surge started in 15-24 year olds, so likely
related to return to university.


Those above retirement age, or below school age are now the least likely
within society to catch covid, though it may well still be more serious
for them if they do.


Yes. We need to 'control' the virus itself before we can return to
normality. In practice by immunising everyone, and re-doing that for any
new strain not covered by the present vaccines. Much cheaper to do than
having a lock down every once in a while. It's not rocket science. Plenty
take medication every day for other things. To vaccinate the entire
country once a year isn't going to be impossible.

--
*The only difference between a rut and a grave is the depth.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #63   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,061
Default Conundrum

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article , Andy Burns
wrote:
T i m wrote:


Whilst I understand on a few hundred otherwise healthy youngsters
have died from Covid19, there is a very good chance many have carried
and passed it onto their parents or grandparents who have died.


Looking at the demographics (which only seem to be available for
England, not the UK as whole, or for the other nations individually)


https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases?areaType=nation%26areaName=England#card-cases_by_specimen_date_age_demographics


It seems the people most likely to test positive at the moment are
10-14 year olds, so highly likely related to the return to school,
though possibly also the less accurate results from LFD compared to
PCR tests.


You can also see the Oct/Nov surge started in 15-24 year olds, so
likely related to return to university.


Those above retirement age, or below school age are now the least
likely within society to catch covid, though it may well still be more
serious for them if they do.


Yes. We need to 'control' the virus itself before we can return to
normality. In practice by immunising everyone, and re-doing that for any
new strain not covered by the present vaccines. Much cheaper to do than
having a lock down every once in a while. It's not rocket science. Plenty
take medication every day for other things. To vaccinate the entire
country once a year isn't going to be impossible.


it is if people refuse the vaccine

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
  #64   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 40,893
Default Conundrum



"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Andy Burns wrote:
Dave Plowman wrote:


John Rumm wrote:

Andrew wrote:

some of recipients of Jab/Jag #1 have died of blood clots ?

as have a number who did not receive Jab #1

Seems strange on a DIY group where people are presumably used to
measuring things that they seem incapable of understanding simple
statistics?


I'm not female, I'm not on the pill, I don't smoke ... so I took my
chances ...


Which means you must think the risks from a vaccine greater than
catching Covid. How did you arrive at this conclusion? You'd need
some pretty specialist knowledge do it with any accuracy.


Nope, just realise that choosing to isolate and have what
you need delivered would work for you.

  #65   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,591
Default Conundrum

On 06/04/2021 15:28, charles wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article , Andy Burns
wrote:
T i m wrote:


Whilst I understand on a few hundred otherwise healthy youngsters
have died from Covid19, there is a very good chance many have carried
and passed it onto their parents or grandparents who have died.


Looking at the demographics (which only seem to be available for
England, not the UK as whole, or for the other nations individually)


https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases?areaType=nation%26areaName=England#card-cases_by_specimen_date_age_demographics


It seems the people most likely to test positive at the moment are
10-14 year olds, so highly likely related to the return to school,
though possibly also the less accurate results from LFD compared to
PCR tests.


You can also see the Oct/Nov surge started in 15-24 year olds, so
likely related to return to university.


Those above retirement age, or below school age are now the least
likely within society to catch covid, though it may well still be more
serious for them if they do.


Yes. We need to 'control' the virus itself before we can return to
normality. In practice by immunising everyone, and re-doing that for any
new strain not covered by the present vaccines. Much cheaper to do than
having a lock down every once in a while. It's not rocket science. Plenty
take medication every day for other things. To vaccinate the entire
country once a year isn't going to be impossible.


it is if people refuse the vaccine


Most people will take the vaccine, if not just for themselves, but for
others too.

Refuseniks annoy me greatly, and so I would be in favour of Covid
Passports being required to attend any gathering.




  #66   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 40,893
Default Conundrum



"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 06 Apr 2021 11:19:04 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

snip

Seems strange on a DIY group where people are presumably used to
measuring things that they seem incapable of understanding simple
statistics?


I'm not female, I'm not on the pill, I don't smoke ... so I took my
chances ...


Which means you must think the risks from a vaccine greater than catching
Covid. How did you arrive at this conclusion? You'd need some pretty
specialist knowledge do it with any accuracy.


Isn't the comparison (for the individual) more between any potential
risk from any vaccine versus the risk of any *illness / death*
resulting from catching something that the vaccine may have
prevented, not actually catching Covid19 (in this case) itself?


Try that sentence again in english, even google
translate doesn't do gobbledegook yet.

The extension of that would be any advantages re herd
immunity, if there was such from the vaccine (not the
case with the Covid19 vaccines as I understand it)?


You have that wrong. The vaccines do prevent infection.
The phase 3 trials didn't test that question because its
harder to do than the other question of preventing
severe disease and death due to the virus. That question
of preventing infection is now being tested and has
been announced with some of them already.

Eg, Whilst I understand on a few hundred otherwise healthy youngsters
have died from Covid19, there is a very good chance many have carried
and passed it onto their parents or grandparents who have died.


That's a different question to herd immunity.

If the vaccine prevented them from carrying the virus
(asymptomatically especially) then it would make sense
to vaccinate them, but again, I don't believe it's the case


It is actually.

(meaning social distancing between them and
their parents / grandparents is the safest bet


Nope. And that doesn't work with aerosols
which are in fact the main problem with
transmission of this virus in the home.

and let them get herd immunity 'naturally'
and so no risks from the vaccine)?


But the risk with getting infected is still higher
than with the vaccine.

Individuals can end up with a lower risk by always
isolating and having what they need delivered but
that isnt really that viable for most young people.

  #67   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,120
Default Conundrum

On Mon, 05 Apr 2021 22:52:05 +0100, Tim Streater wrote:

On 05 Apr 2021 at 18:51:05 BST, "Commander Kinsey" wrote:

On Sun, 04 Apr 2021 22:18:49 +0100, Tim Streater wrote:

On 04 Apr 2021 at 20:19:03 BST, S Viemeister
wrote:

On 04/04/2021 19:49, Tim Streater wrote:
On 04 Apr 2021 at 19:06:45 BST, "Commander Kinsey" wrote:
On Sat, 03 Apr 2021 08:37:02 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:
So fewer doses total, but we were warned of a dip in supply.

Oh, fewer eh? Posh ****.

As opposed to what, O wise one?

Our 'erudite' friend would likely use _less_.

Then he's a fathead.


No, I'm logical. The words mean the same thing. Avoid duplication.


Er no. 'Less" is used with uncountables such as sand [1] or water or fish or
flour. 'Fewer' is used with things that can be counted such as eggs.

[1] Unless you are referring to grains of sand. Those are countable.


You've told me when to use them, but not why it's necessary, because it isn't. "Fewer apples" gives you no more information than "less apples". You don't need to be told apples are countable.
  #68   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 40,893
Default Conundrum



"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Tue, 06 Apr 2021 11:19:04 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:


snip


Seems strange on a DIY group where people are presumably used to
measuring things that they seem incapable of understanding simple
statistics?

I'm not female, I'm not on the pill, I don't smoke ... so I took my
chances ...

Which means you must think the risks from a vaccine greater than
catching
Covid. How did you arrive at this conclusion? You'd need some pretty
specialist knowledge do it with any accuracy.


Isn't the comparison (for the individual) more between any potential
risk from any vaccine versus the risk of any *illness / death*
resulting from catching something that the vaccine may have prevented,
not actually catching Covid19 (in this case) itself?


Of course. By catching Covid, I'm assuming you'd know this by the
symptoms. Until we have exhaustive regular testing, we're not going to
know how many have it but have no symptoms. Whereas we do have figures for
those with symptoms bad enough to go to a doctor. And we also have figures
for any reactions to the vaccine - to date. Obviously long term side
effects from either will have to wait for time to pass.

The extension of that would be any advantages re herd immunity, if
there was such from the vaccine (not the case with the Covid19
vaccines as I understand it)?


Herd immunity generally means letting the weak die and the strong survive.


Nope, it works just as well with non fatal infections.

Maybe OK in the wild, but with mankind and civilisation
the 'brain' can be more important than 'muscle', as it were.


Eg, Whilst I understand on a few hundred otherwise healthy youngsters
have died from Covid19, there is a very good chance many have carried
and passed it onto their parents or grandparents who have died.


Yes - even more so where generations tend to live together.

If the vaccine prevented them from carrying the virus
(asymptomatically especially) then it would make sense to vaccinate
them, but again, I don't believe it's the case (meaning social
distancing between them and their parents / grandparents is the safest
bet and let them get herd immunity 'naturally' and so no risks from
the vaccine)?


The normal way with vaccines is to immunise (near) everyone.


That’s not true either. Some of the viruses that are
more of a nuisance don’t get anything like that result.

So the virus doesn't get transmitted and dies out.
Not of course for ever.


It has with smallpox.

But that was the theory with other vaccinations.



  #69   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,560
Default Lonely Obnoxious Cantankerous Auto-contradicting Senile Ozzie Troll Alert!

On Wed, 7 Apr 2021 04:39:09 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH more of the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread


--
Kerr-Mudd,John addressing the auto-contradicting senile cretin:
"Auto-contradictor Rod is back! (in the KF)"
MID:
  #70   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,560
Default Lonely Obnoxious Cantankerous Auto-contradicting Senile Ozzie Troll Alert!

On Wed, 7 Apr 2021 04:10:57 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH more of the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

--
Keema Nam addressing nym-shifting senile Rodent:
"You are now exposed as a liar, as well as an ignorant troll."
"MID: .com"


  #71   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,560
Default Troll-feeding Senile ASSHOLE Alert!

On 5 Apr 2021 21:52:05 GMT, Dim Streater, the brain dead, troll-feeding,
senile idiot, blathered yet again:


Er no. 'Less" is used with uncountables such as sand [1] or water or fish or
flour. 'Fewer' is used with things that can be counted such as eggs.

[1] Unless you are referring to grains of sand. Those are countable.


Yeah, right, keep "educating" a TROLL, senile asshole! tsk
  #72   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,560
Default Lonely Obnoxious Cantankerous Auto-contradicting Senile Ozzie Troll Alert!

On Wed, 7 Apr 2021 03:52:28 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


Nope


ROTFLOL!

****ing stupid idiot!

--
Kerr-Mudd,John addressing the auto-contradicting senile cretin:
"Auto-contradictor Rod is back! (in the KF)"
MID:
  #73   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,853
Default Conundrum

On 06/04/2021 12:04, T i m wrote:
As I was booking mine online, by the time I'd chosen the date and time
for the second, the first had been allocated to someone else.;-)

So I went back and chose the first date to be at a better time (for
me) a couple more days on and chose the second date (now later as
well) at a later time (than the earliest available) to up the odds.
;-)

Whack-a-mole vaccine booking.;-)


The booking site is a mess.

There's a major site in the town just down the road, and another in the
next town. For my first jab neither were available, only one in the
nearest (small) city and the next nearest 40 miles away.

So I tried the next week. None available at all. Anywhere.

I got a better location for the second one, but still not the nearest one.

Andy
  #74   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,431
Default Conundrum

On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 21:09:34 +0100, Vir Campestris
wrote:

On 06/04/2021 12:04, T i m wrote:
As I was booking mine online, by the time I'd chosen the date and time
for the second, the first had been allocated to someone else.;-)

So I went back and chose the first date to be at a better time (for
me) a couple more days on and chose the second date (now later as
well) at a later time (than the earliest available) to up the odds.
;-)

Whack-a-mole vaccine booking.;-)


The booking site is a mess.


Well I found it fairly easy to follow, other than this simultaneous
date reservation thing. I guess the only way to get round that would
to be to offer both dates and times simultaneously?

There's a major site in the town just down the road, and another in the
next town. For my first jab neither were available, only one in the
nearest (small) city and the next nearest 40 miles away.


Ouch. And there was me talking about having to go 7 (and I chose to go
further away for the easier parking).

So I tried the next week. None available at all. Anywhere.


Feck.

I got a better location for the second one, but still not the nearest one.


Assuming they will have stock then of course ... (re both of us).

Cheers, T i m
  #75   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Conundrum

In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
Refuseniks annoy me greatly, and so I would be in favour of Covid
Passports being required to attend any gathering.


I agree. Seems to be pub managers objecting to this - but they already
check young people's age via documentation, so surely not much more work?
And night clubs usually have a doorman. To keep out undesirables.

--
*OK, who stopped payment on my reality check?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bath Overflow Washer Conundrum Graham Mead UK diy 3 January 11th 05 12:20 AM
Dishwasher electrical conundrum stu UK diy 4 December 31st 04 02:21 PM
Boiler Conundrum IMM UK diy 6 July 19th 04 04:55 PM
AA battery clock conundrum Ian.2 Electronics Repair 14 February 12th 04 11:56 AM
Laminate flooring conundrum Perry UK diy 4 September 22nd 03 09:28 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"