COVID-19: Vaccine and testing procedures Megathread Part 2 [Mod Warning - Post #1]

Beasty

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/21/health/coronavirus-variant-problem-vaccines/index.html

Have you something to say?

Dropping in links without commentary can be quite annoying

ACitizenErased

afatbollix wrote: »

After 3 weeks of your Phizer jab you are 90% immune. The 2nd jab gives you 94% immunity.

Would you rather 10 million people at 90% or 5 million at 94%?

They have looked at the data and it does make sense.


To be honest to me the 2 jabs looks like profit grabbing by Phizer.

Uhhhh not sure where you got those numbers from because they are completely wrong

afatbollix

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Uhhhh not sure where you got those numbers from because they are completely wrong

Here's the data if you think it's wrong take it up with the UK government.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/prioritising-the-first-covid-19-vaccine-dose-jcvi-statement/optimising-the-covid-19-vaccination-programme-for-maximum-short-term-impact

ACitizenErased

afatbollix wrote: »

Here's the data if you think it's wrong take it up with the UK government.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/prioritising-the-first-covid-19-vaccine-dose-jcvi-statement/optimising-the-covid-19-vaccination-programme-for-maximum-short-term-impact

Early estimates from Israel who are the furthest ahead suggest 33% efficacy from the first jab.

The first real-world analysis of the Pfizer/BioNTech coronavirus vaccine suggests it is matching its performance in clinical trials, but raises serious questions about the UK's decision to delay the second dose.
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-real-world-analysis-of-vaccine-in-israel-raises-questions-about-uk-strategy-12192751

Melanchthon

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Early estimates from Israel who are the furthest ahead suggest 33% efficacy from the first jab.

The first real-world analysis of the Pfizer/BioNTech coronavirus vaccine suggests it is matching its performance in clinical trials, but raises serious questions about the UK's decision to delay the second dose.
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-real-world-analysis-of-vaccine-in-israel-raises-questions-about-uk-strategy-12192751

Not really, we should wait till we see symptomatic or hospilisation data from Israel.

The Israel's are saying they are picking up Covid in tests, the UK is talking about reducing symptomatic COVID-19.
It's the symptomatic thing that's the issue, if you've reduced people getting sick by 85-90% for the vulnerable populations your going to make a huge impact on mortality and strain on the health services.
I

ACitizenErased

Melanchthon wrote: »

Not really, we should wait till we see symptomatic or hospilisation data from Israel.

The Israel's are saying they are picking up Covid in tests, the UK is talking about reducing symptomatic COVID-19.
It's the symptomatic thing that's the issue, if you've reduced people getting sick by 85-90% for the vulnerable populations your going to make a huge impact on mortality and strain on the health services.
I

So rather than eliminate the strain you'd rather reduce it? The UK decision is baffling and the EMA and EU countries thankfully agree.

CIARAN_BOYLE

Dempo1 wrote: »

Are the brits making it up as they go, I'd no idea they introduced a longer gap in between dose of vaccine, 12 weeks instead of the recommended 3 weeks, this seems quite extraordinary.

I'd have assumed drug companies have made it clear, along with the reams of data what the recommendations are. This will hardly inspire confidence. This also on the back of shortages and the news the new Oxford Vaccine (yet to be approved EU wide are saying they'll only be able to supply 40 % of what was promised.

There doesn't seem much point in the UK only half vaccinating nearly 5 million people, and whilst I hope they are going on scientific advice, we've actually not even seen results from the Roll out to date.

There's some benefiting to the delayed gap for Astra Zenaca. Not really enough to trust but the efficacy of Astra Zenaca in their interim report was relatively low so going with a different strategy that has some useful data behind it is potentially a good thing.

Extending the gap for Pfizer does not seem to be as a good and Pfizer has lashed out at that decision.

Melanchthon

ACitizenErased wrote: »

So rather than eliminate the strain you'd rather reduce it? The UK decision is baffling and the EMA and EU countries thankfully agree.

As I posted earlier France are now considering it as an option. If they go that way what will you say?
The UK's approach isn't complicated and makes sense for now, the EU approach isn't eliminating the virus either, having 2/3 percent of the population vaccinated with 2 doses doesn't eliminate the virus in the 97% of the population that's had no doses at all.

AdamD

marno21 wrote: »

If J&J single dose is approved it’s an actual game changer. We have enough to vaccinate 40% of the population with their allocation alone.

Not to put a downer on this but our total orders are a bit irrelevant without knowing an actual delivery timeline. We also have enough Pfizer ordered to vaccinate most of the country but the timeline of deliveries is far more important.

afatbollix

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Early estimates from Israel who are the furthest ahead suggest 33% efficacy from the first jab.

The first real-world analysis of the Pfizer/BioNTech coronavirus vaccine suggests it is matching its performance in clinical trials, but raises serious questions about the UK's decision to delay the second dose.
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-real-world-analysis-of-vaccine-in-israel-raises-questions-about-uk-strategy-12192751

https://www.ft.com/content/4d9fe80d-e604-4bbe-b0f8-fd4b8df9b7f1?fbclid=IwAR0LhoU0Dh9vwaWzKmJAg1vFw75Y28BMrvtl4KapTwHkEP0fgOU38X35Q6M

And here’s an other study from Israel saying that it’s 94% after 3 weeks, the data is very new it also needs more data and modelling to find out what really is the best. The media are hopping onto every report, to be fair they do report facts from scientists but data has this strange way of being presented that can be interpreted differently by two different readers.

franciscanpunk

Imagine the UK complete vaccination roll out to everyone who wants one well in advance of EU, just don't think I could handle thier smugness!

When pfizer approved everyone said game changer effective vaccine this will all be over soon. then moderna, total game changer two effective vaccines. AZ hasn't even been approved yet and i was foolishly thinking this is the actual game changer(it hasn't even been approved yet for use and I've gone from extreme hopefullness to just feeling very deflated). Now J & J with one dose and supposed huge amounts already contracted to the EU is the new game changer but I've a feeling that'll just drag on too. I'm Novavax or GSK or maybe Sputnik will be along in 9 months to get hopes up again temporarily:)

I know that AZ only applied for use on 12-1-21 so the 29th isnt a bad turnaround, by why so late? Is the EU harder to deal with? Im sure their is a great deal of communication between the manufactorers and the buyers before the application.

Deeper Blue

Do the studies on the south african variant take into account the T Cell response?

Is it possible the response of an actual person would be different to the lab based tests from those studies?

Wolf359f

franciscanpunk wrote: »

Imagine the UK complete vaccination roll out to everyone who wants one well in advance of EU, just don't think I could handle thier smugness!

When pfizer approved everyone said game changer effective vaccine this will all be over soon. then moderna, total game changer two effective vaccines. AZ hasn't even been approved yet and i was foolishly thinking this is the actual game changer(it hasn't even been approved yet for use and I've gone from extreme hopefullness to just feeling very deflated). Now J & J with one dose and supposed huge amounts already contracted to the EU is the new game changer but I've a feeling that'll just drag on too. I'm Novavax or GSK or maybe Sputnik will be along in 9 months to get hopes up again temporarily:)

I know that AZ only applied for use on 12-1-21 so the 29th isnt a bad turnaround, by why so late? Is the EU harder to deal with? Im sure their is a great deal of communication between the manufactorers and the buyers before the application.

Why so late compared to what? Compared to the UK? The UK approved for emergency use, the EMA is approving for conditional marketing use, it requires a little more steps for safety and validation. Not to mention the mess with the dosing in trials.

Not so long ago it was there would never be a vaccine, to it would take years, to I wouldn't take it till it's proven safe..... so let the EMA review the data and conclude it's safe and effective.

I completely understand the impatience and frustration, but there's going to be no AZ deliveries until mid Feb, so approving it the same day AZ applied wouldn't make the doses magically appear.

J&J maybe the game changer with it being a single dose and the EU have ordered hundreds of millions, but again, once/if it's approved, those hundreds of millions of doses won't just magically appear either.

marno21

AdamD wrote: »

Not to put a downer on this but our total orders are a bit irrelevant without knowing an actual delivery timeline. We also have enough Pfizer ordered to vaccinate most of the country but the timeline of deliveries is far more important.

That is a very fair comment, but my reason for positivity was more the fact that for every dose we get, we vaccinate twice what a dose from Pfizer/Moderna/AZ, and the other benefits such as fridge storage, immunity 10 days after initial dosage etc. It does have the logistical challenges of every vaccine and the potential for delays etc.

franciscanpunk

Wolf359f wrote: »

Why so late compared to what? Compared to the UK? The UK approved for emergency use, the EMA is approving for conditional marketing use, it requires a little more steps for safety and validation. Not to mention the mess with the dosing in trials.

Not so long ago it was there would never be a vaccine, to it would take years, to I wouldn't take it till it's proven safe..... so let the EMA review the data and conclude it's safe and effective.

I completely understand the impatience and frustration, but there's going to be no AZ deliveries until mid Feb, so approving it the same day AZ applied wouldn't make the doses magically appear.

J&J maybe the game changer with it being a single dose and the EU have ordered hundreds of millions, but again, once/if it's approved, those hundreds of millions of doses won't just magically appear either.[/QUOTE

Yeah why so late in relation to the UK? Is it because of Oxford involvement?

Fair point, it is approved in the UK for emergency use only but in terms of how that affects the person getting the jab in their arm and benefits is there any difference between if the the shot thw got as full approval or was part of a batch that get individually approved as emergency approval. The EU block has what 400 or 500m peoole i guess, the UK 65m, why would any company go near a much smaller market pool first without a good reason, I'm just wondering what the reason was. Also, if we were in before the UK would our supply have been as greatly affected i.e 60% reduction(I know this product isnt even approved yet and the idea of buying millions of something not approved in a normal scenario is nuts but this is not normal and given this vaccines relatively low cost vs economic cost of restrictions was not a greater risk to to not get in first and take a punt and buy everything we could get our hands on).

also fully accept J & J, just dont have a a few hundred million doses just sitting there but is it not time to realise on this one we need to be first to approve it(or reject if not safe) rather than being behind the Uk or FDA or whoever else wants to buy it

Wolf359f

marno21 wrote: »

That is a very fair comment, but my reason for positivity was more the fact that for every dose we get, we vaccinate twice what a dose from Pfizer/Moderna/AZ, and the other benefits such as fridge storage, immunity 10 days after initial dosage etc. It does have the logistical challenges of every vaccine and the potential for delays etc.

The logistics and benefits of J&J are extremely positive.
It's literally a jab and go. The lack of need for a second dose means half the time, half the staff, half the paperwork, half the logistics etc....

Wolf359f

franciscanpunk wrote: »

Yeah why so late in relation to the UK? Is it because of Oxford involvement?

Fair point, it is approved in the UK for emergency use only but in terms of how that affects the person getting the jab in their arm and benefits is there any difference between if the the shot thw got as full approval or was part of a batch that get individually approved as emergency approval. The EU block has what 400 or 500m peoole i guess, the UK 65m, why would any company go near a much smaller market pool first without a good reason, I'm just wondering what the reason was. Also, if we were in before the UK would our supply have been as greatly affected i.e 60% reduction(I know this product isnt even approved yet and the idea of buying millions of something not approved in a normal scenario is nuts but this is not normal and given this vaccines relatively low cost vs economic cost of restrictions was not a greater risk to to not get in first and take a punt and buy everything we could get our hands on).

also fully accept J & J, just dont have a a few hundred million doses just sitting there but is it not time to realise on this one we need to be first to approve it(or reject if not safe) rather than being behind the Uk or FDA or whoever else wants to buy it

I honestally don't know the details to the deals with the UK and AZ. The Pfizer deal with Israel has been known, it's like a live trial. The UK took a bet and went early with the Oxford vaccine, had that have failed or the efficiency been lower than expected or delays etc... they would have been up **** creek.

The EU hedged their bets on many vaccines in case some failed. If they bet heavy on X and X failed there would be uproar. People complain they bought Sanofi and that's been delayed till the end of the year is a prime example. If that was first out of the block and they had a massive supply to the EU, people would be laughing at the US and UK.

In relation with approval, the EMA can't actually approve a vaccine until the manufacturer applies for it. For J&J they haven't applied yet, so the EMA cannot do anything until they do.

franciscanpunk

Wolf359f wrote: »

I honestally don't know the details to the deals with the UK and AZ. The Pfizer deal with Israel has been known, it's like a live trial. The UK took a bet and went early with the Oxford vaccine, had that have failed or the efficiency been lower than expected or delays etc... they would have been up **** creek.

The EU hedged their bets on many vaccines in case some failed. If they bet heavy on X and X failed there would be uproar. People complain they bought Sanofi and that's been delayed till the end of the year is a prime example. If that was first out of the block and they had a massive supply to the EU, people would be laughing at the US and UK.

In relation with approval, the EMA can't actually approve a vaccine until the manufacturer applies for it. For J&J they haven't applied yet, so the EMA cannot do anything until they do.

True, can't aporove something until they apply. I'm just saying how do we get them to want to apply to us first, if every vaccine that gets aporoved by the EU has had someone else before us go through the approval process that leads me think there is a reason companies go elsewhere first. From what i can see apart Israel everyone is paying the same price, so why not go to the largest trading block first to get approval.

Wolf359f

franciscanpunk wrote: »

True, can't aporove something until they apply. I'm just saying how do we get them to want to apply to us first, if every vaccine that gets aporoved by the EU has had someone else before us go through the approval process that leads me think there is a reason companies go elsewhere first. From what i can see apart Israel everyone is paying the same price, so why not go to the largest trading block first to get approval.

That is a very good question. I have no clue!
It could be more complex than that though, Russia look set to seek EMA approval for Sputnik V in Feb, they may get a few eastern European countries to buy it, but I mainly believe it's so they can approach other countries with their vaccine to sell it. Having EMA approval would be a good enough reason for countries to look to use it.
It should also boost their own vaccine take up for citizens reluctant to take it with only the Russian's government word on it.

JacksonHeightsOwn

fm wrote: »

That's US time though I presume, ema will be slower?

Yeah, it'll get approved by the ema after a "full review" on April, 2023.

is_that_so

Pfizer has reduced the number of vials it's shipping to account for the 6th dose, but some countries are not doing the 6 properly.


https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-vaccine-doses/european-countries-struggle-to-make-most-of-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-doses-idUSL8N2JQ558

is_that_so

Q&A article on the possible effects on current vaccines and vaccinations of new variants.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/22/covid-vaccines-what-are-the-implications-of-new-variants-of-virus

Kivaro

franciscanpunk wrote: »

Imagine the UK complete vaccination roll out to everyone who wants one well in advance of EU, just don't think I could handle thier smugness!

Shouldn't we applaud that rather than exhibit what some may call begrudgery?
Well done to them if they do achieve that milestone before the EU. It will actually benefit us here in Ireland a great deal.

jackboy

is_that_so wrote: »

Pfizer has reduced the number of vials it's shipping to account for the 6th dose, but some countries are not doing the 6 properly.


https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-vaccine-doses/european-countries-struggle-to-make-most-of-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-doses-idUSL8N2JQ558

That will cause an issue. Those that have been taking the extra doses from the vials will now not have enough for the second dose. This means that others will now need to wait longer for their first dose while those getting the second dose are prioritised.

firemansam4

is_that_so wrote: »

Q&A article on the possible effects on current vaccines and vaccinations of new variants.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/22/covid-vaccines-what-are-the-implications-of-new-variants-of-virus

I really can't see the end of restrictions this year, going by what seems to be coming out now in relation to thee new variants.

Maybe mid summer we can hopefully get to a stage where we could open up somewhat, level 2 restrictions maybe. Masks will probably be staying for the long term I think.

I'm wondering how dominant the new strains might become?
We could potentially be all talking about the second generation of vaccines being rolled out next year, and maybe that may get us a step closer to normality.

AdamD

is_that_so wrote: »

Pfizer has reduced the number of vials it's shipping to account for the 6th dose, but some countries are not doing the 6 properly.


https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-vaccine-doses/european-countries-struggle-to-make-most-of-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-doses-idUSL8N2JQ558

Honestly, that's pretty pathetic stuff from Pfizer.

is_that_so

jackboy wrote: »

That will cause an issue. Those that have been taking the extra doses from the vials will now not have enough for the second dose. This means that others will now need to wait longer for their first dose while those getting the second dose are prioritised.

It's more like Pfizer living up to their contractual obligations and of course getting paid for each dose. Apparently it's how they claim they will get to 2bn doses this year. The information is that 6 shots can be got from them so that's what countries should be doing.

is_that_so

AdamD wrote: »

Honestly, that's pretty pathetic stuff from Pfizer.

You mean that for every 100K doses countries receive they are now actually getting 120K if they do it right? There are no saints in this!

brickster69

It's arrived

https://twitter.com/THedrof/status/1353273087698104321/photo/1

jackboy

is_that_so wrote: »

It's more like Pfizer living up to their contractual obligations and of course getting paid for each dose. Apparently it's how they claim they will get to 2bn doses this year. The information is that 6 shots can be got from them so that's what countries should be doing.

Yeah but they have now screwed us. We gave the sixth dose under the impression we could do the same in the future to get these people the second dose. We will now have to take the first dose off people to give everyone the second dose. It means a that a significant amount of people will be delayed getting the first dose.