Off Topic Thread 5.0

Buer

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I thought the denial was in relation to the 8% effectiveness?

Good point; you might well be correct on that!

Podge_irl

Deleted User wrote: »

I thought the denial was in relation to the 8% effectiveness?

Indeed, which suggests he got the correct political story but completely arsed up the reporting on it. Probably should have contacted a health reporter at some point.

Neil3030

AZ now claiming "of course we had fewer geezers, we wanted to wait for a younger subgroup not to show harmful side effects because ethics and Oxford."

I can almost imagine an accompanying fist pounding an old wooden desk, causing a tea cup to judder in its saucer.

Neil3030

Neil3030 wrote: »

AZ now claiming "of course we had fewer geezers, we wanted to wait for a younger subgroup not to show harmful side effects because ethics and Oxford."

I can almost imagine an accompanying fist pounding an old wooden desk, causing a tea cup to judder in its saucer.

Is AZ not starting to sound a bit compromised here? The vaccination regime data was all over the place and now this?

Is this political interference, an company desperate to be first or just their desire to help get the world passed covid?

Neil3030

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Is AZ not starting to sound a bit compromised here? The vaccination regime data was all over the place and now this?

Is this political interference, an company desperate to be first or just their desire to help get the world passed covid?

Not sure I'd go that fat yet. My prior is: "pharma is really hard and they're not the biggest operation".

Former Former Former

Neil3030 wrote: »

Not sure I'd go that fat yet. My prior is: "pharma is really hard and they're not the biggest operation".

They're not the biggest but they're pretty freakin' big and lack of resources or personnel should not have been an issue for them.

They've made a horse's ass of it. In normal times, there's no way this vaccine would have been approved.

Neil3030

Also: pharma under intense pressure to save the world.

Former Former Former

Neil3030 wrote: »

Also: pharma under intense pressure to save the world.

Well this is it.

Two very effective vaccines and one pretty effective vaccine in less than a year is off-the-charts successful by any measure (plus the Chinese and Russian ones). J&J to report data on their refrigerated, single-dose vaccine next week and THAT could be the real game-changer.

Still though, can't help feeling that Oxford did their bit (i.e. designed the vaccine) but everything AZ have done (run the trials, manufacture the stuff and distribute it) has turned to shyte.

Neil3030

Former Former Former wrote: »

Well this is it.

Two very effective vaccines and one pretty effective vaccine in less than a year is off-the-charts successful by any measure (plus the Chinese and Russian ones). J&J to report data on their refrigerated, single-dose vaccine next week and THAT could be the real game-changer.

Still though, can't help feeling that Oxford did their bit (i.e. designed the vaccine) but everything AZ have done (run the trials, manufacture the stuff and distribute it) has turned to shyte.

They'd surely argue that since it's going into arms, before the biggest pharma company in the world, they did something right. Biggest cluster f*** seems to have been the clinical trial. Even Pfizer had supply issues.

Dave_The_Sheep

And things seem to be going pretty well in the UK, vaccination numbers looking pretty good, so there's that, regardless of whether you think the decision was rushed or not.

(Mind you I'm sure something will come out in years to come about this)

Dave_The_Sheep

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

And things seem to be going pretty well in the UK, vaccination numbers looking pretty good, so there's that, regardless of whether you think the decision was rushed or not.

(Mind you I'm sure something will come out in years to come about this)

My only concern would be if efficacy over 65 or 80 turns out to be poor - and millions of doses have been wasted and those people need another dose. Avoiding waste in vaccination doses is critical.

swiwi_

Switzerland is normally a model of good governance IMO, but the covid show has been a flunk. Mainly for the the two following reasons

1) The Swiss govern by consensus. Everyone gives and takes, no-one gets what they all want, but everyone is happy. But that takes time round the negotiating table. Which is hopeless when time is of the essence in a rapidly evolving pandemic.

2) Switzerland gives lots of individual decision making power to cantons. A pandemic that doesn't respect canton borders need a uniform policy. Imagine if each Irish county made up it's own covid policy: restaurants shut in Tipperary but open in Kilkenny. 10 people allowed in Dublin but 5 in Kildare etc.

The little vaccination doses that arrived have been swallowed up and we are once again at "no vaccines left, not sure when we will have some more".

This is one of the few times I reckon a NZ style of managing situations would have been much better: rather than consensus, it's more about getting on with it, being entrepreneurial, being innovative. Can end up treading on toes, but at least decisions are taken rapidly.

Frankly, Switzerland gets "nul points" from me for covid-19.

Neil3030

Deleted User wrote: »

My only concern would be if efficacy over 65 or 80 turns out to be poor - and millions of doses have been wasted and those people need another dose. Avoiding waste in vaccination doses is critical.

We'll soon start seeing how effective the vaccine is in a far larger population of older people, as the UK started jabbing people several weeks ago. One factor that could also be very important (and difficult to manage in a clinical trial in a time pressure cooker) is the length of time needed to develop an immune response. Older people may just need to wait longer for their immune systems to develop the response. Which wouldn't be the end of the world at all, given (a) they were jabbed first and (b) they'll likely be housebound for months anyway.

Neil3030

swiwi_ wrote: »

Switzerland is normally a model of good governance IMO, but the covid show has been a flunk. Mainly for the the two following reasons

1) The Swiss govern by consensus. Everyone gives and takes, no-one gets what they all want, but everyone is happy. But that takes time round the negotiating table. Which is hopeless when time is of the essence in a rapidly evolving pandemic.

2) Switzerland gives lots of individual decision making power to cantons. A pandemic that doesn't respect canton borders need a uniform policy. Imagine if each Irish county made up it's own covid policy: restaurants shut in Tipperary but open in Kilkenny. 10 people allowed in Dublin but 5 in Kildare etc.

The little vaccination doses that arrived have been swallowed up and we are once again at "no vaccines left, not sure when we will have some more".

This is one of the few times I reckon a NZ style of managing situations would have been much better: rather than consensus, it's more about getting on with it, being entrepreneurial, being innovative. Can end up treading on toes, but at least decisions are taken rapidly.

Frankly, Switzerland gets "nul points" from me for covid-19.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1107224/coronavirus-covid-19-switzerland-by-canton/

I'll bet Appenzell Innerrhoden are insufferably smug right now.

swiwi_

Neil3030 wrote: »

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1107224/coronavirus-covid-19-switzerland-by-canton/

I'll bet Appenzell Innerrhoden are insufferably smug right now.

Yeah a smug little bunch. Last canton to give women the vote I think. Sort of saved by their cheese, which is one of my favourites.

bilston

Deleted User wrote: »

My only concern would be if efficacy over 65 or 80 turns out to be poor - and millions of doses have been wasted and those people need another dose. Avoiding waste in vaccination doses is critical.

About 75% of people over 80 in NI have now had their first jab (not necessarily all AZ though)...over 80s currently account for about 6% of new cases in NI, the first over 80s starting getting their jabs about 3 weeks ago, best in pretty small numbers to begin with. I'd expect the proportion of cases over 80 to start to decline in the next 2-4 weeks.

The EU are just being more cautious than the UK. Given the death toll in the UK I can understand it. There is the risk that it could backfire of course, but we should know soon enough.

I would also say that I've noticed cases start to drop quite quickly in the UK this week, that's obviously mainly because of the lockdown rather than the vaccine, but maybe the vaccine is starting to have some impact...more likely Pfizer though which has been being administered since mid December in the UK.

swiwi_

My Mum sent me this. I'm taking a stab at Louth or Antrim for that accent. Am I right?

C'mon you nordies, here's your chance to shine.

sydthebeat

swiwi_ wrote: »

My Mum sent me this. I'm taking a stab at Louth or Antrim for that accent. Am I right?

C'mon you nordies, here's your chance to shine.

Sounds more like a soft monaghan to me... Thinking Tommy Bowe-esque

swiwi_

sydthebeat wrote: »

Sounds more like a soft monaghan to me... Thinking Tommy Bowe-esque

I wondered about Monaghan too, but you can't be putting down every county. I suppose as an Offaly (?) man, you're putting your rep on the line here too :pac:

bilston

swiwi_ wrote: »

My Mum sent me this. I'm taking a stab at Louth or Antrim for that accent. Am I right?

C'mon you nordies, here's your chance to shine.

Definitely not Antrim

More likely south Down or south Armagh IMO, could be Monaghan or Louth I suppose

mfceiling

swiwi_ wrote: »

My Mum sent me this. I'm taking a stab at Louth or Antrim for that accent. Am I right?

C'mon you nordies, here's your chance to shine.

That's Monaghan direction....gun to my head and I'm going for Emyvale/Tydavnet/Tullygoney.

Or it might be nowhere near that.

awec

It's a southern border accent that's been slightly americanised I think.

Looks like J&J won't be as much of a game changer as hoped - albeit it's still going to curb the severity of the virus a good deal.

Buer

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Looks like J&J won't be as much of a game changer as hoped - albeit it's still going to curb the severity of the virus a good deal.

It's a one dose vaccine that can be stored in normal conditions. It may only have 66% efficacy in prevention but it's far higher when it comes to preventing serious illness.

I think it's going to be a massive game changer particularly for less accessible areas of the world where the two dose approach is going to be a logistical nightmare.

Buer

Buer wrote: »

It's a one dose vaccine that can be stored in normal conditions. It may only have 66% efficacy in prevention but it's far higher when it comes to preventing serious illness.

I think it's going to be a massive game changer particularly for less accessible areas of the world where the two dose approach is going to be a logistical nightmare.

Very true. But it won't stop the spread and I still worry that an AWFUL lot of people are going to refuse to get any vaccine.

aloooof

Deleted User wrote: »

Looks like J&J won't be as much of a game changer as hoped - albeit it's still going to curb the severity of the virus a good deal.

I think it's probably more of a game changer for poorer countries who don't have the cold storage facilities or transport infrastructure for the other vaccines?

The 66% is the headline figure (for moderate and severe disease), but this line from the article is encouraging:

J&J's main goal was the prevention of moderate to severe Covid-19, and the vaccine was 85% effective in stopping severe disease and preventing hospitalisation across all geographies and against multiple variants 28 days after immunisation.

EDIT: what Buer said.

Former Former Former

The J&J trial had large numbers of people in Brazil and South Africa too, so hopefully indicative of activity against the variants.

Buer

Former Former Former wrote: »

The J&J trial had large numbers of people in Brazil and South Africa too, so hopefully indicative of activity against the variants.

Indeed and their numbers are taken into account of the overall efficacy, I believe. The efficacy in the United States trial was 72%.

My understanding is that this is significantly higher than the seasonal flu jab. People are just comparing it to the Pfizer Covid vaccine which was the first available but it comes with very significant restrictions.

Former Former Former

Novartis have now joined Sanofi in signing up to manufacture more of Pfizer's vaccine.

Be graaaaand

Neil3030

Few things stand out in their report:

Massive sample (43.7k).

34% of the sample were over 60.

41% had comorbidities associated with severe Covid (obesity, diabetes etc).

So for the vaccine being 85% effective (after 28 days) at preventing serious disease is quite impressive.

Also, extended time effect, 0 cases of serious disease after 49 days.

We'd have bitten Paul Janssen's arm off for these numbers last October.