• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

COVID 19 Good News Stories

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dent

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2015
Messages
1,106
It looks like there are plans to undertake some widespread t-cell testing; hopefully we can get a real understanding of the level of immunity we have.


Is this reported in any non-paywalled media? We can't really see enough information to comment much.

Hasn't this idea of an "immunity passport" already been called out as a bad idea? It would basically create a two-tier society and turn those without into second-class citizens, hardly fair or good for social cohesion.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
6,538
Location
UK
Is this reported in any non-paywalled media? We can't really see enough information to comment much.

Hasn't this idea of an "immunity passport" already been called out as a bad idea? It would basically create a two-tier society and turn those without into second-class citizens, hardly fair or good for social cohesion.
I couldn't find anything else offhand.


The immunity passport is media speculation, rather than a serious proposal by scientists or the government. I'm more interested to see actually how close to immunity we are, so hopefully we can silence the suppression loonies.
 

RomeoCharlie71

Established Member
Joined
18 Sep 2017
Messages
1,720
Location
Scotland
It looks like there are plans to undertake some widespread t-cell testing; hopefully we can get a real understanding of the level of immunity we have.

The whole article reads:
Thousands of people will be recruited to find out whether they have acquired T-cell immunity to coronavirus under a new trial arranged by a group of British scientists and Public Health England (PHE).

Scientists had originally hoped that infected individuals would develop antibodies which would prevent them getting a second bout of the disease, but recent studies suggest they vanish after a few months.

However, alternative research has found that people infected with a similar Sars-type virus develop T-cell immunity that can last up to 17 years, meaning far more people may be immune for far longer (see box below for details of how antibodies and T-cells work).

Antibodies vs T-cells
PHE has partnered diagnostics company Oxford Immunotec, among others, to evaluate whether their testing kits can adequately pick up T-cell immunity in a large-scale trial involving 3,500 healthcare workers and police officers.

The trial could reignite hopes that immunity "passports" may be possible, allowing protected people to safely return to work.

Oxford Immunotec believes it could help governments plan any future restrictions around a better understanding of population-wide immunity, roll out more comprehensive testing programmes and allow freer movement in the community or internationally.

People would be able to carry out the test at home to know whether they were protected from the virus.

Peter Wrighton-Smith, the CEO of Oxford Immunotec, said: "We believe a successful trial will yield important information about our test, to further our knowledge of how it works and help us to develop the test further."

Recent studies have suggested the immune system can be primed by other coronaviruses, such as the common cold, giving the body a head start in fighting off Covid-19.

Research shows that a separate part of the immune system, T-cells, respond to chains of amino acids produced by different types of coronaviruses and may be responsible for stopping the virus in people who never show symptoms.

Crucially, those T-cells die off in older people, which may be why they are far more likely to develop a more serious illness.

The vaccine being developed by Oxford University has been found not only to stimulate antibodies but also to boost T-cell response.

However, many more people may already have some protection, suggesting herd immunity will be easier and quicker to establish. A recent study suggested children may be protected from coronavirus because they catch so many colds.
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
6,968
Location
Taunton or Kent
Some good news with fatality rates in hospital going down compared to April:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54568926


Coronavirus patients admitted to intensive care have a better chance of surviving now than they did in April, according to the dean of the Faculty of Intensive Care Medicine.
But these gains levelled off over the summer, Dr Alison Pittard said.
The proportion of patients admitted to critical care who die fell by almost a quarter from the peak and as much as half in hospitals overall.
It is too soon to know the survival rate for patients admitted this autumn.
A better understanding of the disease has allowed doctors to treat patients better, including using the steroid dexamethasone and less invasive types of ventilation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

C J Snarzell

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2019
Messages
1,506
My own opinion of this present situation is that overall we do not seem to be in as dire a situation as we were in March/April in terms of risk or fatality. There are deaths, these are of course devastating for their families but the death rate is a hell of a lot lower than it was six months ago.

From my own experience, I know quite a few people who have been infected with Covid during this second wave but thankfully none of those people have been hospitalised and I have not heard through the grapevine of anyone becoming seriously ill this time round. It is as if the strength of the virus is much weaker.

My main concern now is the economy and the effect this is having on people's lives with unemployment, mental health and other illnesses not being treated by the NHS.

CJ
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
6,538
Location
UK

“We confirm the MHRA’s (Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency) rolling review of our potential COVID-19 vaccine,” an AstraZeneca spokesman said.

In rolling reviews, regulators are able to see clinical data in real time and have dialogue with drug makers on manufacturing processes and trials to accelerate the approval process.


The approach is designed to speed up evaluations of promising drugs or vaccines during a public health emergency.

Presumably this indicates that AZ are confident in the results and approaching the final stages of testing.
 
Last edited:

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
6,968
Location
Taunton or Kent
While this hasn't yet been peer-reviewed, evidence has been found supporting T-cell immunity remaining after 6 months:


Scientists have found evidence of immune cells responding to Covid-19 six months after people were infected.

In a study of 100 people with the virus, those with symptoms had a much higher T-cell reaction.

But it is still not clear whether this leads to better protection against re-infection.

The UK research team says the findings are "just one piece of the puzzle" on immunity and there is still a lot to learn.

The key question is whether being infected once with coronavirus can protect the body against being infected again and, if so, how long this immunity could last.

Scientists know that antibodies are made by the body from around 10 days after infection, but appear to dwindle over time. They stick to the virus in order to stop it.

They have also discovered that a kind of immune cell, called a T-cell, attacks the cells infected with the virus. This is known as the cellular immune response and could also be key.

This study, which has not yet been peer-reviewed or published in a journal, suggests T-cells could play the more important role.

The research was carried out by the UK Coronavirus Immunology Consortium, involving the University of Birmingham, the NIHR Manchester clinical research facility and Public Health England.

"Early results show that T-cell responses may outlast the initial antibody response, which could have a significant impact on Covid vaccine development and immunity research," said Dr Shamez Ladhani, study author and consultant epidemiologist at Public Health England.

Prof Paul Moss, from the University of Birmingham, said the study was the first in the world "to show robust cellular immunity remains at six months after infection".

This was based on samples taken from 23 male and 77 female healthcare workers who had been infected with coronavirus in March or April, and had either mild to moderate symptoms or were asymptomatic. None of them were ill enough to be admitted to hospital with Covid-19.

The researchers say it is possible that a good T-cell response might provide people who had symptoms with more protection against being infected again.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
The mass community testing experiment taking place in Liverpool in the near future is definitely good progress. With so many asymptomatic cases, I'm more and more beginning to think that the mass community testing approach will be the best stop-gap to get on top of infections without the devastation of continual lockdowns.
 

jtuk

Member
Joined
4 Jun 2018
Messages
423
The mass community testing experiment taking place in Liverpool in the near future is definitely good progress. With so many asymptomatic cases, I'm more and more beginning to think that the mass community testing approach will be the best stop-gap to get on top of infections without the devastation of continual lockdowns.

If they're just using PCR on a yes/no basis without drilling down to those hitting at a level where someone is actually infectious, as opposed to just picking up fragments of a virus after it's already gone, then this is absolutely the WRONG thing to do
 

6862

Member
Joined
3 Dec 2014
Messages
506
While this hasn't yet been peer-reviewed, evidence has been found supporting T-cell immunity remaining after 6 months:


Its interesting to note that this news was buried halfway down the BBC Top Stories page (on mobile), whereas when research came out saying that immunity was likely short lived, it made the headlines. Evidence of an agenda or what?

But I agree, this seems likely to be very good news. All along I've wondered why everyone is assuming that this virus is going to be so different to all other kinds of coronavirus (and rhinovirus) in terms of immunity? Yes we know you don't always get long term sterilising immunity from these but you definitely have a better immune response to them once you've had it. And yet the narrative being forced on us with this particular coronavirus is that there is no significant immunity, and that even if there is the long term effects are so terrible that your life is ruined afterwards.
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,669
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
The mass community testing experiment taking place in Liverpool in the near future is definitely good progress. With so many asymptomatic cases, I'm more and more beginning to think that the mass community testing approach will be the best stop-gap to get on top of infections without the devastation of continual lockdowns.

I have a horrible feeling this exercise will not be of benefit to the people of Liverpool.....
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,613
Location
First Class
The mass community testing experiment taking place in Liverpool in the near future is definitely good progress. With so many asymptomatic cases, I'm more and more beginning to think that the mass community testing approach will be the best stop-gap to get on top of infections without the devastation of continual lockdowns.

On the contrary I fear it will drive ‘case’ numbers up and be used as justification for further restrictions.

Its interesting to note that this news was buried halfway down the BBC Top Stories page (on mobile), whereas when research came out saying that immunity was likely short lived, it made the headlines. Evidence of an agenda or what?

But I agree, this seems likely to be very good news. All along I've wondered why everyone is assuming that this virus is going to be so different to all other kinds of coronavirus (and rhinovirus) in terms of immunity? Yes we know you don't always get long term sterilising immunity from these but you definitely have a better immune response to them once you've had it. And yet the narrative being forced on us with this particular coronavirus is that there is no significant immunity, and that even if there is the long term effects are so terrible that your life is ruined afterwards.

That’s a good point. I’ve read nothing to suggest that the virus is special in this regard, but that doesn’t fit the ‘deadly virus’ narrative....
 
Last edited:

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
If they're just using PCR on a yes/no basis without drilling down to those hitting at a level where someone is actually infectious, as opposed to just picking up fragments of a virus after it's already gone, then this is absolutely the WRONG thing to do

I would hope that it's the type of test that shows whether it's active or not, rather than just picking up wh's had it in the past. The latter would be useful for understanding levels of people who've had it in the past, but not much for opening up.

I have a horrible feeling this exercise will not be of benefit to the people of Liverpool.....

Well, obviously it depends on what action SAGE and the Government take. If we get "ooh, but we still have to lock down"... type noises, then it's completely pointless. The whole point should be to enable the vast majority who have it at a given time to isolate and cut the transmission of all those people for that period. It's hard to see how that wouldn't bring a material decline in transmission that could be used to open up society.

Granted, it will be a right PITA for those without symptoms who have to isolate, but then again, compared to continuous lockdown, a price worth paying.

On the contrary I fear it will drive ‘case’ numbers up and be used as justification for further restrictions.

I must admit, it's hard to see why the Government would go to this expense and logistical difficulty, just to continue lockdown restrictions which can ba imposed anyway.

That said, I've not heard a lot in the announcement about the mechanisms by which this will this process will replace lockdown restrictions. Government needs to be clear an unambigous that this is the aim, and how this process will achieve that, in order to get the support of the population.
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,669
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
Well, obviously it depends on what action SAGE and the Government take. If we get "ooh, but we still have to lock down"... type noises, then it's completely pointless. The whole point should be to enable the vast majority who have it at a given time to isolate and cut the transmission of all those people for that period. It's hard to see how that wouldn't bring a material decline in transmission that could be used to open up society.

Granted, it will be a right PITA for those without symptoms who have to isolate, but then again, compared to continuous lockdown, a price worth paying.

Given that the government driven by SAGE still seems to want to "beat" the virus, I'm not so sure exposing even more asymptomatic people to the statisticians is a good idea. Sounds like the making of an even bigger stick. I'm actually not sure what use infection figures are to the public any more, they are meaningless without the breakdowns of actual infections vs cases vs hospitalisations vs deaths. This has the hallmarks of being the next "grim" or "terrifying" headlines to drive demand for more lockdowns.

Only if this trial was used simply to break some of the infection chains, with the data given only to those who need them will I be convinced.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
Given that the government driven by SAGE still seems to want to "beat" the virus, I'm not so sure exposing even more asymptomatic people to the statisticians is a good idea. Sounds like the making of an even bigger stick. I'm actually not sure what use infection figures are to the public any more, they are meaningless without the breakdowns of actual infections vs cases vs hospitalisations vs deaths. This has the hallmarks of being the next "grim" or "terrifying" headlines to drive demand for more lockdowns.

Only if this trial was used simply to break some of the infection chains, with the data given only to those who need them will I be convinced.

As to your concluding point, I agree entirely. The only value of such a process would be to break those infection chains and replace lockdown. I'm optimistic that that is the aim here as this is what other countries have used the process for. That said, your cynicism regarding the apparent determination to use all statistics to justify lockdown is partially justified, going by past experience.
 

RomeoCharlie71

Established Member
Joined
18 Sep 2017
Messages
1,720
Location
Scotland
Some more good news on the vaccine front:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54873105
The first coronavirus vaccine can prevent more than 90% of people from getting Covid-19, a preliminary analysis shows.

The developers - Pfizer and BioNTech - described it as a "great day for science and humanity".

Their vaccine has been tested on 43,500 people in six countries and no safety concerns have been raised.

The companies plan to apply for emergency approval to use the vaccine by the end of the month.

There are around a dozen vaccines that have reached the final stages of testing, but this is the first to show any results.

It uses a completely experimental approach - that involves injecting part of the virus's genetic code - in order to train the immune system.

Two doses are needed, three weeks apart, and the pharmaceutical companies say people are protected a week after the second dose.

It has been trialled in the US, Germany, Brazil, Argentina, South Africa and Turkey.

Pfizer believes it will be able to supply 50 million doses by the end of this year and around 1.3 billion by the end of 2021.
 

adc82140

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2008
Messages
2,928
Well done to them. This is a better result than anyone could have hoped for, bearing in mind that only a couple of weeks ago the doom and gloom merchants were saying the best we could hope for was one that may reduce symptoms.
 

Mojo

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
7 Aug 2005
Messages
20,382
Location
0035
Is this the one the UK has already signed for 30 Million of?
 

adc82140

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2008
Messages
2,928
Is this the one the UK has already signed for 30 Million of?
It is indeed. However it needs 2 doses, so enough for 15 million people.

However we have also ordered a fair few million doses of the Oxford one as well.
 

nlogax

Established Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
5,352
Location
Mostly Glasgow-ish. Mostly.
However we have also ordered a fair few million doses of the Oxford one as well.

Correct. Vaccine diversity is key to beating Covid 19 in the long run. As I understand it the UK has orders for 340 million doses across the list of candidate vaccines;
  • BioNTech / Pfizer mRNA - 30 million doses (today's headline vaccine)
  • Janssen AVV - 30 million doses
  • Glaxo / Sanofi PAV - 60 million doses
  • Valneva IWVV - 60 million doses
  • Novavax PAV - 60 million doses
  • Oxford / AZ AVV - 100 million doses
Most of these are at phase 3 somewhere around the world.
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,613
Location
First Class
Some more good news on the vaccine front:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54873105

What exactly is emergency approval? Also, if this vaccine uses a 'completely experimental' approach I can see people being reluctant to take it. The reason I say that is we were told the vaccine(s) were based on existing ones and therefore there was no need to be concerned about how quickly they were being developed. Or have I misunderstood?

Sorry I know this is supposed to be the good news thread, I'm just playing devil's advocate....
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,669
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
What exactly is emergency approval? Also, if this vaccine uses a 'completely experimental' approach I can see people being reluctant to take it. The reason I say that is we were told the vaccine(s) were based on existing ones and therefore there was no need to be concerned about how quickly they were being developed. Or have I misunderstood?

Sorry I know this is supposed to be the good news thread, I'm just playing devil's advocate....

Presumably they will have to seek approval from all the countries they are going to supply. I can possibly see the US pushing hard to get approval over there, and I suspect they will get the lion's share of the initial stocks. As for the vaccine here, if approved it will likely be heavily targeted for those people in the most vulnerable groups. I can't see it being offered nationally until much later next year at the earliest. This will probably be true of others too.
 

MikeWM

Established Member
Joined
26 Mar 2010
Messages
4,382
Location
Ely
What exactly is emergency approval? Also, if this vaccine uses a 'completely experimental' approach I can see people being reluctant to take it. The reason I say that is we were told the vaccine(s) were based on existing ones and therefore there was no need to be concerned about how quickly they were being developed. Or have I misunderstood?

Malcolm Kendrick explained what would be likely to be involved in 'emergency approval' here

https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2020/10/10/a-sars-cov2-vaccine-dont-hold-your-breath/

which doesn't exactly reassure.

Nevertheless, a vaccine is good news - *as long as* there is no element of compulsion (explicit or implicit) for any person or group.
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
6,968
Location
Taunton or Kent
Some more good news on the vaccine front:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54873105
The same article now also says the UK is likely to get 10 million doses of this vaccine by the end of year, so 5 million of us will get it. How this plays out in terms of what restrictions will be in place in January will be interesting - I don't see them all being lifted, but it would seem foolish not to relax enough measures to keep going more easily while we wait for spring, especially as the most vulnerable are expected to be amongst those 5 million potential receivers.
 

jtuk

Member
Joined
4 Jun 2018
Messages
423
That'll be more than enough to do all the health care workers and care home workers that haven't already had the virus
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
6,968
Location
Taunton or Kent
That'll be more than enough to do all the health care workers and care home workers that haven't already had the virus
The number who shielded earlier this year was just over 2 million, so 5 million will cover all of them if they all choose to have it (assuming it's not forced on anyone), then the remainder can go into critical workers most at risk, including those you've mentioned (we don't necessarily have to vaccinate them all in that order).
 

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
5,996
Location
Surrey
Malcolm Kendrick explained what would be likely to be involved in 'emergency approval' here

https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2020/10/10/a-sars-cov2-vaccine-dont-hold-your-breath/

which doesn't exactly reassure.

Nevertheless, a vaccine is good news - *as long as* there is no element of compulsion (explicit or implicit) for any person or group.
Jonathan Vam tam on the five o'clock news conference drew a great analogy for the Pfizer vaccine with waiting on a train platform for a train. He says we can just see the lights down the track, we don't know yet if the train will stop and if it does the doors will open.
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,613
Location
First Class
Malcolm Kendrick explained what would be likely to be involved in 'emergency approval' here

https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2020/10/10/a-sars-cov2-vaccine-dont-hold-your-breath/

which doesn't exactly reassure.

Nevertheless, a vaccine is good news - *as long as* there is no element of compulsion (explicit or implicit) for any person or group.

Thanks that's quite informative.

I'm trying to think positively about this as it's potentially a route out of the current nightmare, however I am a little concerned that it will become, in effect, compulsory. If there are enough people demanding it on social media etc. anything could happen; whilst I struggle to see mandatory vaccination (in this country at least), some kind of health pass/passport isn't that far fetched in my opinion. Six months ago I'd have said there's no way such measures could be introduced, but now I'm not so sure.
 

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
15,982
Location
0036
I expect it will, at a minimum, be mandatory to produce a vaccination certificate to travel to certain countries, as is currently the case with respect to yellow fever in some parts of the world.

Could it become necessary within the country as well? Maybe, to enter extremely crowded venues such as stadia and concert halls. Who knows?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top