All things CoronaVirus

[jhu72]

Update on vaccine availability. Looks like there is an option to purchase another 400M of Pfizer, no date specified. Just purchased another 100M of Modern off option allocation. Plan seems to be to cover 150M people by end of Q2. 100M Moderna and 50M Pfizer.

there is an option to buy up to another 500 million of pfizer, but that needs a separate authorized contract for whatever amount, and there are no or very few terms set on delivery times ahead of a new executed contract. so really, i'm not even sure whether it's an option of any value that anyone else can't cut.

the moderna news is disappointing from the standpoint that if that's all we end up taking for a while... what it means is we don't think we could get a boost in production there by 2nd quarter.

however, it could also mean an elevated confidence in the combo of jnj, azn, and/or novavax. the stated plan continues to be covering everyone that wants one by q2. whether that turns out to be 200 million people that "want one" or or more than that is tbd.

So I take it you read the article I referenced the same way I did; there is a 2nd 100M Moderna purchase? This morning I saw an article from CBS that made it sound like this was the first 100M Moderna purchase.

[wgdsr]

Update on vaccine availability. Looks like there is an option to purchase another 400M of Pfizer, no date specified. Just purchased another 100M of Modern off option allocation. Plan seems to be to cover 150M people by end of Q2. 100M Moderna and 50M Pfizer.

there is an option to buy up to another 500 million of pfizer, but that needs a separate authorized contract for whatever amount, and there are no or very few terms set on delivery times ahead of a new executed contract. so really, i'm not even sure whether it's an option of any value that anyone else can't cut.

the moderna news is disappointing from the standpoint that if that's all we end up taking for a while... what it means is we don't think we could get a boost in production there by 2nd quarter.

however, it could also mean an elevated confidence in the combo of jnj, azn, and/or novavax. the stated plan continues to be covering everyone that wants one by q2. whether that turns out to be 200 million people that "want one" or or more than that is tbd.

So I take it you read the article I referenced the same way I did; there is a 2nd 100M Moderna purchase? This morning I saw an article from CBS that made it sound like this was the first 100M Moderna purchase.

the politico link is talking in the future tense, like they will strike it as bloomberg has been reporting for a week and a half, at the time of fda approval. politico doesn't cite a specific source, but if published they must have some definitive idea. and yes, throughout the politico article, it's a second 100 million.

guess we'll know for sure if that's the limit for now when announced. sounds like that cbs article may be in error.

[jhu72]

Update on vaccine availability. Looks like there is an option to purchase another 400M of Pfizer, no date specified. Just purchased another 100M of Modern off option allocation. Plan seems to be to cover 150M people by end of Q2. 100M Moderna and 50M Pfizer.

there is an option to buy up to another 500 million of pfizer, but that needs a separate authorized contract for whatever amount, and there are no or very few terms set on delivery times ahead of a new executed contract. so really, i'm not even sure whether it's an option of any value that anyone else can't cut.

the moderna news is disappointing from the standpoint that if that's all we end up taking for a while... what it means is we don't think we could get a boost in production there by 2nd quarter.

however, it could also mean an elevated confidence in the combo of jnj, azn, and/or novavax. the stated plan continues to be covering everyone that wants one by q2. whether that turns out to be 200 million people that "want one" or or more than that is tbd.

So I take it you read the article I referenced the same way I did; there is a 2nd 100M Moderna purchase? This morning I saw an article from CBS that made it sound like this was the first 100M Moderna purchase.

the politico link is talking in the future tense, like they will strike it as bloomberg has been reporting for a week and a half, at the time of fda approval. politico doesn't cite a specific source, but if published they must have some definitive idea. and yes, throughout the politico article, it's a second 100 million.

guess we'll know for sure if that's the limit for now when announced. sounds like that cbs article may be in error.

... that's my read as well.

[ggait]

i don't believe that's correct.
however, neither one of us are epidimeologists. so, different strokes.

CDC defines a close contact as exposure to another person within six feet for 15 minutes aggregate over a 24 hour period.

You can get that in a bar, restaurant, church or gym easily.

Arguing with a ref for 30 seconds inside a cavernous empty indoor arena is a contact. It is not a close contact.

But backing up a few feet would make it a no contact.

[wgdsr]

Update on vaccine availability. Looks like there is an option to purchase another 400M of Pfizer, no date specified. Just purchased another 100M of Modern off option allocation. Plan seems to be to cover 150M people by end of Q2. 100M Moderna and 50M Pfizer.

there is an option to buy up to another 500 million of pfizer, but that needs a separate authorized contract for whatever amount, and there are no or very few terms set on delivery times ahead of a new executed contract. so really, i'm not even sure whether it's an option of any value that anyone else can't cut.

the moderna news is disappointing from the standpoint that if that's all we end up taking for a while... what it means is we don't think we could get a boost in production there by 2nd quarter.

however, it could also mean an elevated confidence in the combo of jnj, azn, and/or novavax. the stated plan continues to be covering everyone that wants one by q2. whether that turns out to be 200 million people that "want one" or or more than that is tbd.

So I take it you read the article I referenced the same way I did; there is a 2nd 100M Moderna purchase? This morning I saw an article from CBS that made it sound like this was the first 100M Moderna purchase.

the politico link is talking in the future tense, like they will strike it as bloomberg has been reporting for a week and a half, at the time of fda approval. politico doesn't cite a specific source, but if published they must have some definitive idea. and yes, throughout the politico article, it's a second 100 million.

guess we'll know for sure if that's the limit for now when announced. sounds like that cbs article may be in error.

... that's my read as well.

here's the cbs article?
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/moderna-co ... ion-doses/

maybe they updated or edited it?

here's moderna's release
https://investors.modernatx.com/news-re ... lion-doses

so again, either disappointing or good news. impossible to know yet. this was their pace already. i would've given a 100 million tranche a 99% chance. this was a given. i was hoping for more to be done in q2.

[jhu72]

... that CBS article is not the one I saw this AM. It gives more detail and is longer. So it looks like CBS updated their coverage from an earlier article. The Politico article is from last night. Given the time stamp on the CBS article, it may be possible what I saw was an article from late yesterday, early this morning.

[wgdsr]

i don't believe that's correct.
however, neither one of us are epidimeologists. so, different strokes.

CDC defines a close contact as exposure to another person within six feet for 15 minutes aggregate over a 24 hour period.

You can get that in a bar, restaurant, church or gym easily.

Arguing with a ref for 30 seconds inside a cavernous empty indoor arena is a contact. It is not a close contact.

But backing up a few feet would make it a no contact.

eyerolls? seriously? perfect. sounds like you've done all your homework.

carry on.

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://theconversation.com/amp/the-oxf ... ont-151755

[Typical Lax Dad]

i don't believe that's correct.
however, neither one of us are epidimeologists. so, different strokes.

CDC defines a close contact as exposure to another person within six feet for 15 minutes aggregate over a 24 hour period.

You can get that in a bar, restaurant, church or gym easily.

Arguing with a ref for 30 seconds inside a cavernous empty indoor arena is a contact. It is not a close contact.

But backing up a few feet would make it a no contact.

eyerolls? seriously? perfect. sounds like you've done all your homework.

carry on.

I would say there is no good reason to have a loud face to face conversation with someone for 30 seconds or more. Taking the mask off to talk face to face is kind of ridiculous.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/10/21/cum ... 19-spread/

Experts have long noted that the 15-minute, within-six-feet rule was not some sort of threshold that needed to be hit for transmission to occur. So much about whether spread happens depends on how infectious a person is, how well-ventilated the room that people are in is, how the virus might move through the air in a particular setting, whether people are wearing masks, and more. The 15-minute window had just been used as a benchmark to prioritize who should be followed up with for contact tracing and quarantine.

One reason why the length of interactions might matter, experts think, is because people need to be exposed to a certain level of virus if they’re going to get infected. Researchers still aren’t sure what that “infectious dose” is — and if a higher dose corresponds to how sick people are likely to get — but the thought is that the longer someone is around someone else who is infectious, the higher level of virus they will be subjected to, and the more likely they are to get Covid-19.

[jhu72]

https://theconversation.com/amp/the-oxf ... ont-151755

... this article sheds some light on what CSL is doing since the failure of their co-developed vaccine with the Australian University failed. Looks like they will be manufacturing the Oxford Astrazeneca vaccine.

[PizzaSnake]

i don't believe that's correct.
however, neither one of us are epidimeologists. so, different strokes.

CDC defines a close contact as exposure to another person within six feet for 15 minutes aggregate over a 24 hour period.

You can get that in a bar, restaurant, church or gym easily.

Arguing with a ref for 30 seconds inside a cavernous empty indoor arena is a contact. It is not a close contact.

But backing up a few feet would make it a no contact.

eyerolls? seriously? perfect. sounds like you've done all your homework.

carry on.

I would say there is no good reason to have a loud face to face conversation with someone for 30 seconds or more. Taking the mask off to talk face to face is kind of ridiculous.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/10/21/cum ... 19-spread/

Experts have long noted that the 15-minute, within-six-feet rule was not some sort of threshold that needed to be hit for transmission to occur. So much about whether spread happens depends on how infectious a person is, how well-ventilated the room that people are in is, how the virus might move through the air in a particular setting, whether people are wearing masks, and more. The 15-minute window had just been used as a benchmark to prioritize who should be followed up with for contact tracing and quarantine.

One reason why the length of interactions might matter, experts think, is because people need to be exposed to a certain level of virus if they’re going to get infected. Researchers still aren’t sure what that “infectious dose” is — and if a higher dose corresponds to how sick people are likely to get — but the thought is that the longer someone is around someone else who is infectious, the higher level of virus they will be subjected to, and the more likely they are to get Covid-19.

Not too many people I’m dying to meet...

[Typical Lax Dad]

i don't believe that's correct.
however, neither one of us are epidimeologists. so, different strokes.

CDC defines a close contact as exposure to another person within six feet for 15 minutes aggregate over a 24 hour period.

You can get that in a bar, restaurant, church or gym easily.

Arguing with a ref for 30 seconds inside a cavernous empty indoor arena is a contact. It is not a close contact.

But backing up a few feet would make it a no contact.

eyerolls? seriously? perfect. sounds like you've done all your homework.

carry on.

I would say there is no good reason to have a loud face to face conversation with someone for 30 seconds or more. Taking the mask off to talk face to face is kind of ridiculous.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/10/21/cum ... 19-spread/

Experts have long noted that the 15-minute, within-six-feet rule was not some sort of threshold that needed to be hit for transmission to occur. So much about whether spread happens depends on how infectious a person is, how well-ventilated the room that people are in is, how the virus might move through the air in a particular setting, whether people are wearing masks, and more. The 15-minute window had just been used as a benchmark to prioritize who should be followed up with for contact tracing and quarantine.

One reason why the length of interactions might matter, experts think, is because people need to be exposed to a certain level of virus if they’re going to get infected. Researchers still aren’t sure what that “infectious dose” is — and if a higher dose corresponds to how sick people are likely to get — but the thought is that the longer someone is around someone else who is infectious, the higher level of virus they will be subjected to, and the more likely they are to get Covid-19.

Not too many people I’m dying to meet...

[PizzaSnake]

Hmm. Residual effects of his summer COVID-19?

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/ ... rida-state

[holmes435]

Seeing a whole lot of local restaurants fold up the past month for good or for "the next few months" (read "for good"), and most of them in the past two weeks.

The Republican lead government is failing us on an unprecedented scale, and the president is AWOL and inciting civil war. Democrats aren't my party, but with the whiny crybaby secession talk and similar sentiments, I don't see myself voting for any Republicans in the near future (I normally find a few level headed ones down ballot).

Not sure who is ultimately responsible for the insanity that has taken hold of the right, but it's starting to tear the country apart in a meaningful way.

[njbill]

Not sure who is ultimately responsible for the insanity that has taken hold of the right, but it's starting to tear the country apart in a meaningful way.

I am.

[jhu72]

Seeing a whole lot of local restaurants fold up the past month for good or for "the next few months" (read "for good"), and most of them in the past two weeks.

The Republican lead government is failing us on an unprecedented scale, and the president is AWOL and inciting civil war. Democrats aren't my party, but with the whiny crybaby secession talk and similar sentiments, I don't see myself voting for any Republicans in the near future (I normally find a few level headed ones down ballot).

Not sure who is ultimately responsible for the insanity that has taken hold of the right, but it's starting to tear the country apart in a meaningful way.

... the insanity of the "base" predates Orange Duce. You can't lay all the blame at Trump's feet. This craziness goes back to the early 70's with the Nixon crowd.

[wgdsr]

there was this friday:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/new ... ssion=true

hopefully, sii can get this guy to shut up already and respect his non-disclosure.

[jhu72]

Hmm. Residual effects of his summer COVID-19?

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/ ... rida-state

... this "reality" is worse than my "speculation".

[jhu72]

there was this friday:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/new ... ssion=true

hopefully, sii can get this guy to shut up already and respect his non-disclosure.

I have to agree with the outside expert -- One critic of SII’s decision to sue the vaccine trial volunteer, an independent expert in evidence-based medicine, Hilda Bastian, stated, “Maybe there’s a worse way to handle this, but I find it hard to imagine one.”

[Bart]

Hmm. Residual effects of his summer COVID-19?

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/ ... rida-state

... this "reality" is worse than my "speculation".

And what is this “reality”