Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 404 posts

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#261

Post by varispeed »

robjan wrote: post #159
varispeed wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiosity, what kind of money we are talking about? For example checking up sprained ankle at A&E? Many of my friends being disappointed with NHS go for example to Mexico for private treatment and it works much better that doing it here, plus you can enjoy the climate and great food.

Not giving medical advice but you probably shouldn't be going to A&E for a sprained ankle unless it's very serious or a suspected break. For people who are not ordinarily resident in the UK an A&E admission costs £100-£500 plus any tests and treatment. There's a small amount of margin which is used to offset the cost of recovering the money and the fact that sometimes the bills go unpaid.

I see, so it is not the kind of situation when you need to consider getting mortgage to pay off the medical bill. It was just an example. General advice I heard is that when you can't go to GP and walk-in is either too far away or closed, you can go to A&E or call 111 for instructions.

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#262

Post by Throwaway1771 »

refurb wrote: post #119
checker659 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not NHS, but what’s stopping private companies from purchasing from pfizer at 10x markup and selling to willing customers?

I don't think private parties will have any access to vaccine for a while. Can you imagine the shit storm if some wealth person got vaccinated ahead of the doctors treating dying Covid patients. Ain't gonna happen.

This kind of egregious injustice happens daily.

This will, too.

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#263

Post by M2Ys4U »

makomk wrote: post #154
Munksgaard wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this really true? I know that, at least here in Denmark, the relevant authority has sent out a note saying, explicitly, that dying of eg. a heart attack, while infected with COVID-19, does not count as a COVID-19 death. It also explicitly says the same thing about motor-cycle accidents, which I know has been a rumor that has made the rounds. Source: https://sundhedsdatastyrelsen.dk/-/media/sds/filer/rammer-og...

It's true in the UK. Anyone who dies with 28 days of testing positive for Covid-19 is counted as a Covid death, don't think there are exceptions for obvious things like motor-cycle accidents and definitely not for heart attacks (some of those probably are caused by Covid). Also, the NHS is testing almost everyone admitted to hospital. Used to be anyone who died at any point after testing positive but that messed with…

There are several different ways these figures are collected and reported.

As for the cause of death, FullFact has this to say:

When completing a death certificate, the responsible medical professional is asked to determine which conditions may have contributed to death. They are also asked to determine “the disease or injury that initiated the train of events directly leading to death” and this is called the “underlying cause”.[0]

So deaths that were caused by COVID-19 will be reported as such, and that's different from the number of people that died with COVID-19.

Note also that it's a criminal offence to knowingly report an incorrect cause of death on a death certificate.

[0] https://fullfact.org/health/causes-of-death-october-2020/

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#264

Post by fakedang »

refurb wrote: post #119
checker659 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not NHS, but what’s stopping private companies from purchasing from pfizer at 10x markup and selling to willing customers?

I don't think private parties will have any access to vaccine for a while. Can you imagine the shit storm if some wealth person got vaccinated ahead of the doctors treating dying Covid patients. Ain't gonna happen.

Well celebrities were tested before frontline workers.

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#265

Post by ceejayoz »

bserge wrote: post #259
thisistheend123 wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey thanks for your comment. Could you describe in more detail how the vaccines are currently being stored in your clinic? How long does the vaccine can remain in room temperature, once taken out of clod storage. How many doses have been allocated to your clinic and on an average how many patients do you foresee being vaccinated over a short period of time, let's say a month. Also, are health workers also planning to…

I've stated this is my worry with the BioNTech/Fosun vaccine - transporting it safely to Eastern Europe. They can't seem to transport frozen fish properly, I really hope they keep that vaccine in proper conditions, otherwise it'll be rendered useless...

It's likely the chain of custody for fish and critical medical supplies will be somewhat different.

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#266

Post by J-dawg »

natex wrote: post #257
J-dawg wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK government has already stated that pregnant women won't be getting the vaccine. ( https://inews.co.uk/news/health/covid-vaccine-pregnant-women... ) This seems at odds with the gung-ho "it's 100% safe" rhetoric of our politicians. I am by no means an anti-vaxxer, but I'm already finding it creepy the way any concerns are simply being dismissed. It's also just bad policy: it means that any unexpected side-effect…

The concerns are not being "simply dismissed". You just didn't take the time to read any of the material. "JCVI recognises that the MHRA’s advice is based on the absence of evidence in pregnancy, and not on the presence of evidence to implicate toxicity in pregnancy." It's all laid out for anyone with true concerns. Here you go: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

Thanks for that. And you're right, I hadn't seen that document before.

But concerns absolutely are being dismissed. I've personally listened to Matt Hancock and other ministers doing it.

The idea that someone might want to wait just a little longer to see if any side effects emerge is not necessarily irrational.

Would you not concede that, if and when any unexpected side-effects do emerge (however rare or insignificant), this gung-ho attitude will backfire?

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#267

Post by fakedang »

adwww wrote: post #249
refurb wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think private parties will have any access to vaccine for a while. Can you imagine the shit storm if some wealth person got vaccinated ahead of the doctors treating dying Covid patients. Ain't gonna happen.

It sounds like in some countries, the rich will be able to get the vaccine ahead of official channels - eg. https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/racing/uae-team-emirates-...

On the contrary, vaccinations started early in November in the UAE. They are using the weaker Chinese vaccine though.

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#268

Post by prawn »

CivBase wrote: post #260
prawn wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prof Stephen Powis - the guy mentioned in the same sentence. You can see the convention continues in the very next paragraph: "The second person vaccinated in Coventry was William Shakespeare, 81, from Warwickshire, who said he was "pleased" to be given the jab and hospital staff had been "wonderful"."

Those quotes in the next paragraph are explicitly attributed to William. There is no explicit attribution for the "historic moment" quote.

Seemed pretty obvious to me. There are further, similar examples in the story. Maybe you can write to them to clarify for peace of mind.

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#269

Post by bserge »

SlateBlate wrote: post #59
mikepechadotcom wrote: post #32

I feel like mRNA vaccines have huge potential, but I am really, really concerned about potential side effects. Does anyone know which other helper-substances are inside the vaccine, besides the RNA?

Why is this comment getting downvoted? seems like a fair question. I've seen this now in several threads where even questioning side effects of the vaccine gets downvoted and looked down upon like they did something illegal. This is not HN I used to know.

I'm just going to write it: There's always going to be a minority that's shafted by the medical community, we don't matter as long as the majority benefits (fair enough imo, except I can't do shit even if I sign up to absolve everyone of responsibility and take it all on myself).

There will be side effects, they will be dismissed by doctors, people will be marginalized, called uneducated morons and pushed towards more radical communities.

It won't stop until a critical mass of people realize this is no better than treating people differently for being gay.

Right now, the pharma/medical industries are all-powerful. Can't do anything significant without them involved, and if your doctors turn out to be idiots with a degree, well you're shit out of luck, especially in Europe, where the holy universal healthcare can not be questioned.

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#270

Post by dmurray »

learc83 wrote: post #200
dmurray wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems almost impossible that the vaccines pose a greater risk than the risk of not using them. While this is a reasonable conclusion from what we've read in the media, it's worth noting that this is at odds with the official opinions of the EMA and the FDA. They both believe more data is needed, or that the agencies need more time to analyze the data, before they can decree that the benefits most likely outweigh…

The FDA set a meeting date for December 10th, that was at least somewhat arbitrary. They reportedly had no one working for 4 days during Thanksgiving break, so It's likely they could have just worked through Thanksgiving and had that meeting last week if they'd wanted to.

Yeah, the real reason the agencies haven't approved it is closer to "the wheels of bureaucracies that big turn very slowly", but the official reason is still that the data they've seen so far is inconclusive.
Post reply on HN