Coronavirus

[Max B Gold]

Mass testing in our Toon Hall this week as we are top dogs in the whole of Scotchlandshire for infection rates. Yessss!, get in, another first.

[StillSpike]

Go on then, divulge.

Could the mods/admins do a big alias outing like was done a few years back?

Do it !

[Currywurst and Chips]

Out out out out

[Long slender neck]

Theres no aliases to out

England hospital deaths seem to be stagnant at around 300 a day.

[Currywurst and Chips]

Confucius

Cavalier

Digby Chicken Caesar

To name 3

[Max B Gold]

Go on then, divulge.

Could the mods/admins do a big alias outing like was done a few years back?

Do it !

Not sure this is really necessary.

[Still wrong]

Confucius

Cavalier

Digby Chicken Caesar

To name 3

I really haven’t a clue what you are talking about.

[Ronnie Hotdogs]

Go on then, divulge.

Haha - no probs, and by the way there is a difference to having multiple aliases (ii) at the same time and just having updated your username for your single account occasionally. I changed mine mostly when new boards were created - as did many others.

So, I've been LothariO & Helicopter Boy (years ago). I can't recall any others but I might have missed one. Pretty boring stuff tbh.

How about you PW? Reveal all.

Who?

[Ronnie Hotdogs]

Ok, I'm going to jump before I'm pushed.

I admit that I have used the following right wing aliases for some low-level trolling but only to wind up the lefties a bit and have never posted anything overly nasty or personal. Please feel free to delete them:

- Thor
- Dohnut
- Dunnem

[BoniO]

Go on then, divulge.

Haha - no probs, and by the way there is a difference to having multiple aliases (ii) at the same time and just having updated your username for your single account occasionally. I changed mine mostly when new boards were created - as did many others.

So, I've been LothariO & Helicopter Boy (years ago). I can't recall any others but I might have missed one. Pretty boring stuff tbh.

How about you PW? Reveal all.

Who?

He's the moderator.

[BoniO]

Theres no aliases to out

Well that's you on the naughty list for Xmas

[Thor]

Well let’s get back to what’s going on. This is lifted directly off pzifer website.

The MHRA’s decision is based on a rolling submission, including data from the Phase 3 clinical study, which demonstrated a vaccine efficacy rate of 95% (p<0.0001) in participants without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (first primary objective) and also in participants with and without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (second primary objective), in each case measured from 7 days after the second dose. The first primary objective analysis is based on 170 cases of COVID-19, as specified in the study protocol. Efficacy was consistent across age, gender, race and ethnicity demographics, with an observed efficacy in adults age 65 and over of more than 94%. In the trial, BNT162b2 was generally well tolerated with no serious safety concerns reported by the Data Monitoring Committee to date. Today’s decision also is based on a review of Pfizer’s and BioNTech’s Chemistry, Manufacturing and Control (CMC) data for BNT162b2.

Are they saying 170 cases were observed? And we are approving a vaccine that’s was observed on so few numbers?

[Still wrong]

[quote=Thor post_id=159664 time=1606945442 user_id=123]
Well let’s get back to what’s going on. This is lifted directly off pzifer website.

The MHRA’s decision is based on a rolling submission, including data from the Phase 3 clinical study, which demonstrated a vaccine efficacy rate of 95% (p<0.0001) in participants without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (first primary objective) and also in participants with and without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (second primary objective), in each case measured from 7 days after the second dose. The first primary objective analysis is based on 170 cases of COVID-19, as specified in the study protocol. Efficacy was consistent across age, gender, race and ethnicity demographics, with an observed efficacy in adults age 65 and over of more than 94%. In the trial, BNT162b2 was generally well tolerated with no serious safety concerns reported by the Data Monitoring Committee to date. Today’s decision also is based on a review of Pfizer’s and BioNTech’s Chemistry, Manufacturing and Control (CMC) data for BNT162b2.

Are they saying 170 cases were observed? And we are approving a vaccine that’s was observed on so few numbers?
[/quote]

The more enlightened ones amongst us can see this doesn’t add up.
It has taken them 60 years to find a flu vaccine that is 40% success rate.
Now they are telling us they have got a 90% success rate for a virus which is a year old.
This is from a company which has been fined millions over the last 20 years.

[tuffers#1]

Well let’s get back to what’s going on. This is lifted directly off pzifer website.

The MHRA’s decision is based on a rolling submission, including data from the Phase 3 clinical study, which demonstrated a vaccine efficacy rate of 95% (p<0.0001) in participants without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (first primary objective) and also in participants with and without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (second primary objective), in each case measured from 7 days after the second dose. The first primary objective analysis is based on 170 cases of COVID-19, as specified in the study protocol. Efficacy was consistent across age, gender, race and ethnicity demographics, with an observed efficacy in adults age 65 and over of more than 94%. In the trial, BNT162b2 was generally well tolerated with no serious safety concerns reported by the Data Monitoring Committee to date. Today’s decision also is based on a review of Pfizer’s and BioNTech’s Chemistry, Manufacturing and Control (CMC) data for BNT162b2.

Are they saying 170 cases were observed? And we are approving a vaccine that’s was observed on so few numbers?

The more enlightened ones amongst us can see this doesn’t add up.
It has taken them 60 years to find a flu vaccine that is 40% success rate.
Now they are telling us they have got a 90% success rate for a virus which is a year old.
This is from a company which has been fined millions over the last 20 years.

You do know that every flu, every year is usually different to the strain from last years &
Will be different to next years , hence why it is difficult to pin down a real cure as technically
It isnt 1 disease !!

[Still wrong]

I didn’t say it was.
There are also at least 30 strains of coronavirus.

[tuffers#1]

I didn’t say it was.
There are also at least 30 strains of coronavirus.

I know ,
Coronavirus has been around since the 1920s

Looks like it might not be such a rushed vaccine after all

Just a really slow response untill it started infecting
Human Beings !

[Still wrong]

I didn’t say it was.
There are also at least 30 strains of coronavirus.

I know ,
Coronavirus has been around since the 1920s

Looks like it might not be such a rushed vaccine after all

Just a really slow response untill it started infecting
Human Beings !

Who did it infect before?

[tuffers#1]

I didn’t say it was.
There are also at least 30 strains of coronavirus.

I know ,
Coronavirus has been around since the 1920s

Looks like it might not be such a rushed vaccine after all

Just a really slow response untill it started infecting
Human Beings !

Who did it infect before?

Dont you mean WHAT did it infect before?

[Still wrong]

I know ,
Coronavirus has been around since the 1920s

Looks like it might not be such a rushed vaccine after all

Just a really slow response untill it started infecting
Human Beings !

Who did it infect before?

Dont you mean WHAT did it infect before?

Human beings?

[tuffers#1]

Who did it infect before?

Dont you mean WHAT did it infect before?

Human beings?

You know that Spanish flu from way back when
Was an influenza known as
H1N1 dontcha

In other words
Swine Flu .

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influen ... btype_H1N1

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu

[Still wrong]

Dont you mean WHAT did it infect before?

Human beings?

You know that Spanish flu from way back when
Was an influenza known as
H1N1 dontcha

In other words
Swine Flu .

I believe it infected human beings.

[tuffers#1]

Human beings?

You know that Spanish flu from way back when
Was an influenza known as
H1N1 dontcha

In other words
Swine Flu .

I believe it infected human beings.

You are Boring me Cav

Running yourself around in circles .
Put the telly on & watch the snooker
Untilll the adult.channels start fella

[Still wrong]

You know that Spanish flu from way back when
Was an influenza known as
H1N1 dontcha

In other words
Swine Flu .

I believe it infected human beings.

You are Boring me Cav

Running yourself around in circles .
Put the telly on & watch the snooker
Untilll the adult.channels start fella

Blimey I was enjoying that.
Just trying to get to the bottom of you saying coronavirus has been around for 100 years and it’s only just started infecting human beings.
Bizarre.

[tuffers#1]

I believe it infected human beings.

You are Boring me Cav

Running yourself around in circles .
Put the telly on & watch the snooker
Untilll the adult.channels start fella

Blimey I was enjoying that.
Just trying to get to the bottom of you saying coronavirus has been around for 100 years and it’s only just started infecting human beings.
Bizarre.

Scientists have been studying corona virus since it was 1st noticed in 1920
The fact that it started killing humans , made it important to find a cure.

In all the animals it was in, they really didnt care to much obviously.

No need to get to the bottom of things if its not killing Human Beings is there?

[Dunners]

I need the logic behind this explaining: