Jump to content

The coronabrexit thread. I mean, coronavirus thread


Gone

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, maxjam said:

“But the results also offer the “intriguing possibility that if you do run a booster campaign because you want to protect individuals, it may also have this effect of reducing transmission,” says Eyre.”

PS “The study has not yet been peer reviewed.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

50% efficacy is fairly good for most vaccines? (Sorry losing cognitive functions as have been drinking ? )

I'm not saying anything about efficacy. Just if it is 90% in the beginning, and 50% after 4-5 months it's still worthwhile. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

“But the results also offer the “intriguing possibility that if you do run a booster campaign because you want to protect individuals, it may also have this effect of reducing transmission,” says Eyre.”

Yes thats what the study concludes... Effectiveness against transmission reduces to that similar of an unvaccinated person after 12 weeks and recommends a booster campaign.  Both things I have said several times in this thread recently.  Not quite sure why I keep being picked up on it tbh. 

Not one person has bothered to question the tweets posted by @jimmyp on page 252?!?

 

4 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

PS “The study has not yet been peer reviewed.”

The study was funded by the Govt, undertaken by Oxford Uni and is currently under peer review.  I recall reading a couple of articles about it in medical journals when I researched it a while back and its interesting now that Boris Johnson has come out and said the vaccines don't protect against transmission so its probably only a matter of time - but thats pure conjecture on my part.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/what-unrefereed-preprint

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Yes thats what the study concludes... Effectiveness against transmission reduces to that similar of an unvaccinated person after 12 weeks and recommends a booster campaign.  Both things I have said several times in this thread recently.  Not quite sure why I keep being picked up on it tbh. 

Not one person has bothered to question the tweets posted by @jimmyp on page 252?!?

 

The study was funded by the Govt, undertaken by Oxford Uni and is currently under peer review.  I recall reading a couple of articles about it in medical journals when I researched it a while back and its interesting now that Boris Johnson has come out and said the vaccines don't protect against transmission so its probably only a matter of time - but thats pure conjecture on my part.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/what-unrefereed-preprint

Yeah whatever. What’s your point? You not having a vaccine? Or a booster?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Yes thats what the study concludes... Effectiveness against transmission reduces to that similar of an unvaccinated person after 12 weeks and recommends a booster campaign.  Both things I have said several times in this thread recently.  Not quite sure why I keep being picked up on it tbh. 

Not one person has bothered to question the tweets posted by @jimmyp on page 252?!?

 

The study was funded by the Govt, undertaken by Oxford Uni and is currently under peer review.  I recall reading a couple of articles about it in medical journals when I researched it a while back and its interesting now that Boris Johnson has come out and said the vaccines don't protect against transmission so its probably only a matter of time - but thats pure conjecture on my part.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/what-unrefereed-preprint

Out of interest are the unvaccinated they are comparing to people who have already had / tested positive for covid or not , there seems to be lots of talk around natural immunity from having it lasting longer , though person experience is quite hard to work out as in the main the  people I know who have tested positive after being double jabbed have also tested positive before as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

I know I am, but again what is your point?

@Stive Pesley intially posted the study so we discussed it briefly. 

@Eddie quite rudely called me out for misinformation, so I repeated the study (the misinformation I was accused off)

Now you questioned where I got 12 weeks from so I replied.

What is your point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, maxjam said:

@Stive Pesley intially posted the study so we discussed it briefly. 

@Eddie quite rudely called me out for misinformation, so I repeated the study (the misinformation I was accused off)

Now you questioned where I got 12 weeks from so I replied.

What is your point?

Its not yet ‘facts’ its not been peer reviewed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

 ?

 

37 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

 (Sorry losing cognitive functions as have been drinking ? )

 

19 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Yeah whatever. What’s your point? You not having a vaccine? Or a booster?

 

Edited by Norman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Its not yet ‘facts’ its not been peer reviewed.

Repeating this from an earlier post as you are repeating yourself;

The study was funded by the Govt, undertaken by Oxford Uni and is currently under peer review.  I recall reading a couple of articles about it in medical journals when I researched it a while back and its interesting now that Boris Johnson has come out and said the vaccines don't protect against transmission so its probably only a matter of time - but thats pure conjecture on my part.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/what-unrefereed-preprint

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...