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

nommm

nommm wrote: »

Anyway, the news from Merck this morning is making me even more grateful for the mRNA vaccines. If you had told me a year ago that Merck and Sanofi had failed and we were relying on biotech startups, I would have laughed.

It really highlights the importance of bleu sky research, it would be great if the Irish government started funding this kind of research again, similar to what the US and Germany do.

I think Merck looked at their data and realised they were so far behind and the efficacy of the vaccines already approved was so good, that unless they had results comparable to those already available, they would never make any money from it

AdamD

Gael23 wrote: »

What power has she though? If they can’t make the vaccines there’s little a politician can do about it

Well I guess that's the point - is it that they can't make them or is it who is getting the deliveries? And if their production is down 60% why are we only hearing about it now? Have for example, the UK been getting full deliveries in Q1? The EU may question whether some of those orders should have been kept for EU deliveries

etc. etc.

And in terms of power, the EU has a tonne.

seamus

Gael23 wrote: »

What power has she though? If they can’t make the vaccines there’s little a politician can do about it

She's privvy to more information than us plebs.

The suggestion this morning was that AZ's reduced supply was nothing to do with "poor yields" and that they instead had decided to divert stocks of the vaccine to other markets.

If Von der Leyen is telling them to cop and deliver, then this would appear indeed to be the case. You can't make someone deliver something they don't have, so she obviously believes they have it.

It wouldn't surprise me tbh. These are still private companies, whose primary goal is profit.

I'm hearing today Pfizer have managed to convince the Americans to "compensate" them for the fact they can get more than 5 doses per vial.

So if AZ could get more money for their stocks, it wouldn't surprise me that they might try and spread themselves a bit thin.

stephenjmcd

nommm wrote: »

Anyway, the news from Merck this morning is making me even more grateful for the mRNA vaccines. If you had told me a year ago that Merck and Sanofi had failed and we were relying on biotech startups, I would have laughed.

It really highlights the importance of basic research, it would be great if the Irish government started funding this kind of research again, similar to what the US and Germany do.

The use of mRNA could potentially explode now, so many illnesses that could potentially be tackled. A very exciting time in that sense

IRISHSPORTSGUY

https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/eu-astrazeneca-101.html

Following AstraZeneca's announcement that it will be delivering less vaccine than planned, Brussels is threatening legal action. In the responsible committee of the EU Commission, the manufacturer should now provide answers to pressing questions.

The EU and its member states have provided the pharmaceutical industry with around one billion euros to develop a corona vaccine. But when it comes to vaccination, countries that do not belong to the European Union are ahead. Israel, for example. The USA. And the direct EU neighbor Great Britain.

In the United Kingdom alone, more people have been vaccinated in the last three days than in France during the entire corona pandemic, British Health Minister Matt Hancock polemicized. And he pretends to have a vaccination available at the beginning of the pandemic. What is certain, however, is that three quarters of people over 80 in Great Britain have already been vaccinated.

Decision of the drug agency EMA is expected
No EU member state has succeeded in doing this so far. However, the UK also benefits from the extradition policy of the British-Swedish group AstraZeneca. He has been supplying Great Britain with the corona vaccine without any restrictions since the beginning of December. It is still not approved in the EU. By Friday at the latest, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) will decide whether to give the green light.

But even if it does so this week, AstraZeneca will deliver around 60 percent less vaccine to the EU than contractually promised last year. "The fact that the UK continues to deliver as planned and that the European Union is cutting back," says European politician and vaccine expert Peter Liese as a provocation. If the British-Swedish company does not bring stocks from its British depots to continental Europe very quickly, then, Liese told the ARD studio in Brussels, "it will get into the greatest trouble with the EU".

EU is AstraZeneca's largest customer
What this "biggest annoyance" should look like in concrete terms remains unclear. Because the contract with AstraZeneca, which the EU Commission concluded last August for over 300 million vaccine doses with an option for a further 100 million, is being kept under lock and key by the EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen's team. It is unclear when AstraZeneca will be responsible for delivery delays. Only if the commitments have not been fulfilled by the end of the quarter? Or also in the case of delivery fluctuations within the three-month cycles?

One thing is certain: the EU is AstraZeneca's largest customer. The von der Leyen team had already agreed with the British-Swedish group in October to start vaccine production immediately. So regardless of approval by the European Medicines Agency. Only now, almost three months later, does the group report on production problems in the EU. The question is how many vaccine doses were produced in the last year, where they are stored and when they will be delivered.

Council President Michel: EU expects compliance with the treaty
EU Council President Charles Michel speaks of great impatience among the population. The entire population is suffering from bottlenecks in vaccine production and vaccination.

The EU expects the contracts confirmed by the pharmaceutical companies to be adhered to, Michel emphasized to the French TV broadcaster Europe 1. In order to guarantee compliance with the contracts, the EU Council President underlined, without further details Detail to go.

The von der Leyen team expects AstraZeneca to present a detailed delivery schedule to the responsible committee of the EU Commission today. And the Commission and the member states answered the question of who actually got the vaccine doses that the EU ordered in August and that AstraZeneca had produced from October until the end of the year. So in those two months in which there was no talk of production problems at the manufacturer.

stephenjmcd

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I think Merck looked at their data and realised they were so far behind and the efficacy of the vaccines already approved was so good, that unless they had results comparable to those already available, they would never make any money from it

Yeah reading the statement its basically we can't match the effiency of what's already out and what's coming, essentially they'd be so far behind multiple other companies

stephenjmcd

IRISHSPORTSGUY wrote: »

https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/eu-astrazeneca-101.html

I would expect that the talks this week will lead to supply being diverted from other plants such as the UK into Europe as is suggested above.

Would seem like reasonable middle ground if its workable

MerlinSouthDub

stephenjmcd wrote: »

I would expect that the talks this week will lead to supply being diverted from other plants such as the UK into Europe as is suggested above.

Would seem like reasonable middle ground if its workable

I wonder how the UK will react if UK manufactured supplies are diverted to the EU? They will huff and puff, but can't really stop them being exported.

Baggly

stephenjmcd wrote: »

No offence to other posters and apologies to mods on advance if overstepping here but this thread seems to have diverted to zero covid which it isn't about.

Again apologies in advance if this is overstepping the line.

Mod

In future report and leave it to the mods; dont post about it.

Point stands - this is not a zero covid thread.

stephenjmcd

MerlinSouthDub wrote: »

I wonder how the UK will react if UK manufactured supplies are diverted to the EU? They will huff and puff, but can't really stop them being exported.

Certainly will be intersting but there does seem to be some suspicions that supply might have been diverted & turns out the EU can check the companies books.

Intersting line coming from EU sources as well via Reuters
"A second senior EU official said the bloc had a contractual right to check the company's books to assess production and deliveries."

stephenjmcd

Baggly wrote: »

Mod

In future report and leave it to the mods; dont post about it.

Point stands - this is not a zero covid thread.

As posted apologies for overstepping

funnydoggy

How much protection does the first dose Pfizer vaccine confer, 13 days in?

ACitizenErased

Breaking news from Moderna:
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1353699891818754048?s=20

MerlinSouthDub

MerlinSouthDub wrote: »

I wonder how the UK will react if UK manufactured supplies are diverted to the EU? They will huff and puff, but can't really stop them being exported.

Well, they could, as they are outside the EU they won't be subject to the trade rules that might stop them. They too have a contract and I'd be surprised if it didn't specify they have first option on any UK production. Add to that there are plenty of laws they could use to seize the manufacturing if it came to it. They are in part being supplied by some EU production and they could risk losing that.

froog

Ireland is now 11th in the world for vaccinations per capita.

lbj666

seamus wrote: »

She's privvy to more information than us plebs.

The suggestion this morning was that AZ's reduced supply was nothing to do with "poor yields" and that they instead had decided to divert stocks of the vaccine to other markets.

If Von der Leyen is telling them to cop and deliver, then this would appear indeed to be the case. You can't make someone deliver something they don't have, so she obviously believes they have it.

It wouldn't surprise me tbh. These are still private companies, whose primary goal is profit.

I'm hearing today Pfizer have managed to convince the Americans to "compensate" them for the fact they can get more than 5 doses per vial.

So if AZ could get more money for their stocks, it wouldn't surprise me that they might try and spread themselves a bit thin.

I normally hate to speculate, but could it be that EMA are not going to approve for over 55s without more data, meaning that Az-Oxford have decided to divert supplies to countries where it has been approved and can be of better use on people at higher risk.

ACitizenErased

Moderna reported findings from a study that used blood samples from eight people who had received two doses of the vaccine, and two monkeys that had also been immunized.

The British variant had no impact on the levels of neutralizing antibodies — the type that can disable the virus — produced after vaccination. But with the South African form, there was a sixfold reduction in those levels.

Even so, the company said, those antibodies “remain above levels that are expected to be protective.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/25/health/coronavirus-moderna-vaccine-variant.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur

Cork2021

Excellent news

https://twitter.com/coronavirusgoo1/status/1353701236458070016?s=21

seamus

stephenjmcd wrote: »

The use of mRNA could potentially explode now, so many illnesses that could potentially be tackled. A very exciting time in that sense

One of the most exciting applications was a suggestion that an mRNA-based "vaccine" for cancer could be derived by performing a biopsy on the cancerous cell, identifying some key markers, and then developing a personalised mRNA vaccine that would train your body to fight off your specific cancer.
This would mean that relapses are virtually unheard of, your body would annihilate any residual cancer cells after the tumour(s) is removed.

Over time then, and based on thousands of cancer biopsies, it's hoped that a generic mRNA vaccine could be developed that would defend against 99% of cancers before they even develop.

The idea that in the past we used to take inactivated viruses or bacteria and inject them into people will seem as low-tech and brutal as infecting children with cowpox to defend against smallpox.

MerlinSouthDub

Deleted User wrote: »

Well, they could, as they are outside the EU they won't be subject to the trade rules that might stop them. They too have a contract and I'd be surprised if it didn't specify they have first option on any UK production. Add to that there are plenty of laws they could use to seize the manufacturing if it came to it. They are in part being supplied by some EU production and they could risk losing that.

If the UK stop the legal exportation of AZ vaccines, then the retaliation from the EU on exports to the UK of other medicines would be quite serious.

dominatinMC

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Breaking news from Moderna:
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1353699891818754048?s=20

Brilliant news. What will all the merchants of doom cling onto next I wonder? :pac:

ACitizenErased

Moderna have also announced they are entering a booster into Phase 1 trials out of an abundance of caution.
All good news.

Gael23

So looks like the US have done a secret deal with AZ?

funnydoggy

seamus wrote: »

One of the most exciting applications was a suggestion that an mRNA-based "vaccine" for cancer could be derived by performing a biopsy on the cancerous cell, identifying some key markers, and then developing a personalised mRNA vaccine that would train your body to fight off your specific cancer.
This would mean that relapses are virtually unheard of, your body would annihilate any residual cancer cells after the tumour(s) is removed.

Over time then, and based on thousands of cancer biopsies, it's hoped that a generic mRNA vaccine could be developed that would defend against 99% of cancers before they even develop.

The idea that in the past we used to take inactivated viruses or bacteria and inject them into people will seem as low-tech and brutal as infecting children with cowpox to defend against smallpox.

My heart fluttered reading that

castletownman

Question: where would the tourist industry fall on the scale for the vaccine roll-outs. Face-to-face amenities, like tour guides etc.? I assume it'll be towards the end of the list?

MerlinSouthDub

MerlinSouthDub wrote: »

If the UK stop the legal exportation of AZ vaccines, then the retaliation from the EU on exports to the UK of other medicines would be quite serious.

Well that is partially true, but the main issue would be between the UK and Astra Zeneca (a private company). It was the UK government that funded the production sites in the UK, and I'm sure that was done with a proviso that it would prioritise supply to the UK. They wouldn't be blocking exports if it came to it. They'd be seizing the production facilities from a private company under national legislation and the goods wouldn't be available for export. The UK production was meant to produce 120m doses originally, that's been knocked down to 80m. Total UK order is 100m so I'd be very surprised if they allow much of that to go elsewhere. Maybe there's a compromise in there somewhere.

At this point anyway EU countries need to work out the logistics for supplying Pfizer and Moderna to the next risk groups now as we know better how much of those we are getting.

Sconsey

castletownman wrote: »

Question: where would the tourist industry fall on the scale for the vaccine roll-outs. Face-to-face amenities, like tour guides etc.? I assume it'll be towards the end of the list?

Broadly speaking (there are exceptions) the vaccine rollout priority list is driven by the liklehood of bad outcomes on the people that are infected. So the fact that someone works in the tourist industry does not matter, what matters is their age, their health status, etc.

timsey tiger

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Moderna have also announced they are entering a booster into Phase 1 trials out of an abundance of caution.
All good news.

Is this a booster, for people previously vaccinated with the Moderna vaccine for the new variants?

CIARAN_BOYLE

timsey tiger wrote: »

Is this a booster, for people previously vaccinated with the Moderna vaccine for the new variants?

It's for the South Africa variant I believe.

ACitizenErased

timsey tiger wrote: »

Is this a booster, for people previously vaccinated with the Moderna vaccine for the new variants?

Yes, they don't think its necessary but are doing it in case