Kansas Crimson

Posted: **Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:17 pm**

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 4:17 pm
jeepinjayhawk wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 3:53 pm One of my staff tested positive after his roommate tested positive yesterday.

I tell my staff that certainly have been in close contact with him that they should get tested (I am) , and my boss jumps my ass for being a fear monger. I had a total hip replacement a few months ago, I have a salesman who has MS, and another that lost half of his intestines a few months ago, so I feel that these people should know asap.

I guess I am the a-hole here.
no, you aren’t

is michhawk your boss?

No, but similarly informed.

Posted: **Thu Dec 17, 2020 11:12 am**

Oh!

So other resorts were up front this season and said, yeah cuz of covid were requiring reservations to ski, even for season pass holders, in an attempt to avoid crowds during covid.

But WP didn’t, and even went so far as to explicitly include it in their sales pitch. “We’re NOT requiring reservations, so buy passes with us! Act soon, cuz sale’s over December 11!”

But then this week, right after the sale was over, WP announced they’re requiring reservations after all. Skiers are all loosing their minds now and accusing the resort of a bait and switch.

Posted: **Thu Dec 17, 2020 11:57 am**

I think the skiers are right.

Posted: **Thu Dec 17, 2020 12:07 pm**

so, what’s with there being more doses in the pfizer vaccine vials than was previously thought?

supposed to be 5 per, but there are reports of 6 and even 7 in some vials

wtf?!? if they screwed that up, what else got screwed up?

Posted: **Thu Dec 17, 2020 12:23 pm**

jhawks99 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 17, 2020 11:57 am I think the skiers are right.

Oh yeah, totally. I agree. The resort is either acting not in good faith, or just actually that incompetent. I dunno which is worse.

If there IS some blame to be put on the skiers, it’s a certain “buyer beware.” After every other resort did it, and after all the resorts already had to shut down once, and after this entire ski season has been conspicuously in jeopardy all along, what did everyone think was gonna happen? Has the writing not been on the wall all along? Forking over a bunch of cash for a leisure activity already in limbo during a pandemic ain’t the brightest move either way.

But yeah, the resort can and should be blamed for some shady sales practices. They either knew it would come to reservations and knowingly said otherwise, or they’ll claim they genuinely didn’t know? But how the eff would you not know? You’ve seen your own numbers.

I don’t know if there’s any remedy at this point though.

(I’m tempted to make a ski bum joke about how the resort knows no class action suit could be brought cuz they knew ski bums couldn’t afford lawyers once they spent their life savings on a ski pass)

Posted: **Thu Dec 17, 2020 12:34 pm**

Weird. You ski outdoors where you are at, correct?

Posted: **Thu Dec 17, 2020 1:00 pm**

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Thu Dec 17, 2020 12:07 pm so, what’s with there being more doses in the pfizer vaccine vials than was previously thought?

supposed to be 5 per, but there are reports of 6 and even 7 in some vials

wtf?!? if they screwed that up, what else got screwed up?

I was on the Biosafety committee for a different vaccine.

For that company, there original protocol was based on having all vials having the same concentration in them, but when they actually purified the mRNA there was some variability to the concentration. One of the things the committee made them change in the protocol, was that for the trials they administered based on the tested concentration of the vials, rather than a specific volume. My guess is that is what is happening here.

You have a protocol that purifies to a minimum concentration. When tested there's a minimum threshold...so say it has to be above 50 ug/ul...If it's 55 ug/ul it passed the threshold, same if it's 75 ug/ul. (I assume there's a top end too, but basically you'll use anything that passes that threshold, for example, a vial passes quality control if it's between 50 and 100 ug/ul [I'm making these numbers up for sake of example, but there's some range in concentration you'd allow for]).

My guess is, they realized that many/most/all of the vials had quite a bit higher concentrations above threshold, and since there are a limited number, if you can get 12 doses out of a vial instead of 10 it's preferable as long as everyone is still getting a dose above the minimum requirement.

Also, if a dose is, say 100 ul, than a vial for 5 doses would require 500 ul. Pharmaceutical companies, add slightly more (5-10% more) to account for evaporation, aerosols, etc.

My understanding is that this was basically crafty medical staff who realized they could stretch the available vaccine, rather than a mistake by pfizer, and that after running it up the chain they got the ok to do it.

Posted: **Thu Dec 17, 2020 1:40 pm**

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Thu Dec 17, 2020 1:00 pm
TraditionKU wrote: ↑Thu Dec 17, 2020 12:07 pm so, what’s with there being more doses in the pfizer vaccine vials than was previously thought?

supposed to be 5 per, but there are reports of 6 and even 7 in some vials

wtf?!? if they screwed that up, what else got screwed up?
I was on the Biosafety committee for a different vaccine.

For that company, there original protocol was based on having all vials having the same concentration in them, but when they actually purified the mRNA there was some variability to the concentration. One of the things the committee made them change in the protocol, was that for the trials they administered based on the tested concentration of the vials, rather than a specific volume. My guess is that is what is happening here.

You have a protocol that purifies to a minimum concentration. When tested there's a minimum threshold...so say it has to be above 50 ug/ul...If it's 55 ug/ul it passed the threshold, same if it's 75 ug/ul. (I assume there's a top end too, but basically you'll use anything that passes that threshold, for example, a vial passes quality control if it's between 50 and 100 ug/ul [I'm making these numbers up for sake of example, but there's some range in concentration you'd allow for]).

My guess is, they realized that many/most/all of the vials had quite a bit higher concentrations above threshold, and since there are a limited number, if you can get 12 doses out of a vial instead of 10 it's preferable as long as everyone is still getting a dose above the minimum requirement.

Also, if a dose is, say 100 ul, than a vial for 5 doses would require 500 ul. Pharmaceutical companies, add slightly more (5-10% more) to account for evaporation, aerosols, etc.

My understanding is that this was basically crafty medical staff who realized they could stretch the available vaccine, rather than a mistake by pfizer, and that after running it up the chain they got the ok to do it.

thanks for the info. i thought there might be a reasonable explanation, and i definitely hope that’s the case

it just seems odd to me, particularly given the level of production. but, that may actually exacerbate the variation in concentration

regardless, somebody dropped the ball (surprise, surprise). given the uber need for a strong public-relations campaign with this particular vaccine, i would think you’d want all of that kind of information out in the open ahead of roll-outs. having a story “break” in the media, with pfizer and the feds having to answer questions about does nobody any good on the road to trying to get as many people vaccinated as possible

Posted: **Thu Dec 17, 2020 1:49 pm**

MICHHAWK wrote: ↑Thu Dec 17, 2020 12:34 pm Weird. You ski outdoors where you are at, correct?

The skiing itself, yes, obviously.
But the bigger problem lies with the crowding in lift lines, and sharing lift chairs and gondolas, and on-mountain dining and shopping and other amenities yall have come to expect.

Indeed, many ski vacations involve little or no actual skiing.

Heck, even just the bathroom sitch. When you’ve got thousands of tourists trying to use the same 3 stalls or whatever...they were prone to long lines and crowded waits even before covid.

Posted: **Thu Dec 17, 2020 1:58 pm**

oh c’mon, ousie...mich has assured us that most everyone is following all the guidelines and recommendations

the fungus don’t care

Posted: **Thu Dec 17, 2020 4:25 pm**

ugh...MIL just tested positive

had swine flu back in 09 and said this is so much worse

Posted: **Thu Dec 17, 2020 4:42 pm**

Hoping for the best Trad.

Posted: **Thu Dec 17, 2020 5:05 pm**

thnx...she’s a nurse herself, so has been extra cautious. still managed to pick it up

Posted: **Thu Dec 17, 2020 7:07 pm**

We're rooting for you, Trad.

Posted: **Thu Dec 17, 2020 9:21 pm**

Actually, Trad and PhD, I heard another explanation from an ex-FDA guy (a consultant at work). Overages are one thing, but the overages were calculated to accommodate two types of syringes. If you used one type of syringe then there wouldn’t be very much left after you administered the required doses. However, if you used the other kind then you have almost a whole dose, and then some remaining! But they had to count on never having the efficient syringe!

Unfortunately the latter kind is apparently not widely available. Overages are required by regulations because it is unreasonable to expect that you would get every last molecule out of the container.

Posted: **Fri Dec 18, 2020 8:00 am**

Hope she's better soon, Trad.

Posted: **Fri Dec 18, 2020 8:05 am**

Uhh, I guess CO got almost 17k fewer doses than scheduled to arrive today.

Pfizer says they have the doses, they just haven’t received instructions from operation warp speed on how to distribute them or some shit.

Posted: **Fri Dec 18, 2020 8:26 am**

jhawks99 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 18, 2020 8:00 am Hope she's better soon, Trad.

Likewise.

Posted: **Fri Dec 18, 2020 9:04 am**

jfish26 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 18, 2020 8:26 am
jhawks99 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 18, 2020 8:00 am Hope she's better soon, Trad.
Likewise.

Best wishes Trad

Posted: **Fri Dec 18, 2020 10:04 am**

thanks, all

if it weren’t such a serious situation, guaranteed i’d be throwing out MIL jokes

Kansas Crimson

COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground

Re: COVID-19 - On the Ground