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

Cork2021

Why are the EU pushing to get what is contractually supposed to be coming to them if they knew or had any inkling which I’m sure they have that it’s only 8% efficacious for over 65’s??
I’d be pushing for more Pfizer and moderna if that was the case, And wouldn’t be too worried about a drop in delivery amounts especially with J&J just around the corner and a few more later on in Spring?

Edit: I know they’ve ordered more of both the moderna and Pfizer but I’m on about the here and now not 8 months down the road!

stephenjmcd

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If the reports are true then the reduced delivery doesnt make much difference at this point so. Just need to focus on what has been approved and how to get it to group 3 ASAP. And hope things work out in the UK which has become effectively a large trial.

Well it would still make a difference. Theres always been the caveat if one vaccine proved better in younger age groups then the plan could flip and they'd be priority

JacksonHeightsOwn

obviously i hope the 8% efficacy is untrue.

and i have to admit, i just find it hard to believe that Astra Zeneca have tried to sell a vaccine with such poor results. Surely its just not possible

Danzy

jackboy wrote: »

True but they are also doing a live experiment on the population with the Pfizer vaccine rather than following the approved dosing regime, so they have plenty lunatics also.

They have but as far as this area of science goes they have the 2nd best agency in the world and well ahead of others.

Being the best doesn't prevent lots of fuc upz

Indestructable

Danzy wrote: »

Whatever else about the tans, immunology, vaccines, epidemiology, they are world authorities in and have been for a very long time.

Outside of the CDC they are the 2nd best in the world.

There was definite political pressure in the UK for speedy approval also, hopefully that didn't sway the regulators.

snowstorm445

If this is true, it's a massive shot in the arm for the anti-vaxxers (pardon the pun). They will be all over this. Let's hope there's something amiss here.

jackboy

Indestructable wrote: »

There was definite political pressure in the UK for speedy approval also, hopefully that didn't sway the regulators.

If it did then the regulators are corrupt.

Hurrache

Cork2021 wrote: »

Why are the EU pushing to get what is contractually supposed to be coming to them if they knew or had any inkling which I’m sure they have that it’s only 8% efficacious for over 65’s??
I’d be pushing for more Pfizer and moderna if that was the case, And wouldn’t be too worried about a drop in delivery amounts especially with J&J just around the corner and a few more later on in Spring?

Edit: I know they’ve ordered more of both the moderna and Pfizer but I’m on about the here and now not 8 months down the road!

They're pushing for a plausible explanation as to what the real reasons are for not getting the doses.

Maybe it's a chess move as they believe AZ are holding back as they're aware of the +65 issue. Would AZ want to manufactur a bunch of doses which may have a reduced demand for?

ACitizenErased

I'm quite surprised at AZ tbh, would have thought they'd be one of the better pharmaceuticals but this is a PR disaster for them.

Van.Bosch

ACitizenErased wrote: »

I'm quite surprised at AZ tbh, would have thought they'd be one of the better pharmaceuticals but this is a PR disaster for them.

If true and you were 64, would you want it. If it’s not deemed safe for 65 year olds? It’s a mess!

Sierra Oscar

snowstorm445 wrote: »

If this is true, it's a massive shot in the arm for the anti-vaxxers (pardon the pun). They will be all over this. Let's hope there's something amiss here.

It's terrible, especially if it turns out older people will require another round of vaccinations in the UK as a result. It will dash confidence in the whole healthcare response. Hopefully it isn't true but it's clear there is something awry with AstraZeneca vaccine of late given all the controversy.

stephenjmcd

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Well it would still make a difference. Theres always been the caveat if one vaccine proved better in younger age groups then the plan could flip and they'd be priority

My point was the reduced AZ delivery is now possibly less relevant in the context of the current situation.

Obviously if it is only approved for a younger cohort we can use the limited supply for those groups immediately but the focus has to shift to how we get the better vaccines to group 3. Logistically we were reliant on GPs for group 3 but now we may need to figure something else out.

RugbyLad11

If this 8% efficiency for people over 65 is true, then will young people get the vaccine before September?

Van.Bosch

Van.Bosch wrote: »

If true and you were 64, would you want it. If it’s not deemed safe for 65 year olds? It’s a mess!

It's not that it isn't safe.

DaSilva

snowstorm445 wrote: »

If this is true, it's a massive shot in the arm for the anti-vaxxers (pardon the pun). They will be all over this. Let's hope there's something amiss here.

Honestly I think its a score against the anti-vaxxers, a lot of the more "respectable" anti-vax rhetoric I've been hearing lately is based on the idea that the vaccines wouldn't be allowed fail, that they would be given out as "hopium" regardless of efficacy. The EMA not approving when the data doesn't add up shows they have scientific integrity. Failures in this rapid vaccine creation process demonstrates the authenticity of it in my opinion.

I know what you mean though, some of the lower grade anti-vaxxers will still use this as proof they are right

Cork2021

Can anyone explain this the ? Only a week ago...

https://twitter.com/germanyinmumbai/status/1351460371995889668?s=21

JTMan

Assuming this is the case and the European Medicine Agency only approve Astrazeneca vaccine for under 65s later this week, I assume the HSE have to change the priority groups? Will 60-65 year olds be first to receive the AZ vaccine?

Indestructable

Van.Bosch wrote: »

If true and you were 64, would you want it. If it’s not deemed safe for 65 year olds? It’s a mess!

It's still safe, just not much use.

iamwhoiam

Can anyone explain to me why a vaccine would have such a massive difference in efficacy in different age groups please

Cork2021

JTMan wrote: »

Assuming this is the case and the European Medicine Agency only approve Astrazeneca vaccine for under 65s later this week, I assume the HSE have to chase the priority groups? Will 60-65 year olds be first to receive the AZ vaccine?

In fairness I’d probably be keeping the Pfizer and moderna vaccines for people over 60.
AstraZeneca for at risk groups under 60 then first.

Amirani

Danzy wrote: »

They have but as far as this area of science goes they have the 2nd best agency in the world and well ahead of others.

Being the best doesn't prevent lots of fuc upz

Well the US agencies that you consider best in the world haven't been in a hurry to authorise AstraZeneca's vaccine and have been unhappy with elements of trial design and operation.

Hence they're requiring further Phase 3 trials before considering it.

DaSilva

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Can anyone explain to me why a vaccine would have such a massive difference in efficacy in different age groups please

I don't understand this 8% claim to be honest.

My gut feeling is that its not 8% efficacy in older age groups, but rather there is not enough evidence it works in older age groups, so they cant authorize it.

Maybe when more data comes out of the other trial wings of the Oxford vaccine study we will know more about older age groups, but if I remember right most of the data is coming from the Brazil group which was entirely <55 years of age and the UK and South Africa groups which had only something like 100 people over the age of 65.

So in a way its very much like the children situation, its not that it doesn't work in children, just the data isn't there to say it does yet

Turtwig

Trouble here is if you don't have data it works for over 65s how confident can you be that it works for medically vulnerable under that age? Particularly immuno comprised individuals.

That said we're getting ahead of ourselves. The US data may yet show it works in the older cohorts. The EMA can only approve based on the data AZ submitted.

stephenjmcd

Next EU meeting Wednesday

https://twitter.com/SKyriakidesEU/status/1353805555048075264?s=19

Amirani

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Can anyone explain to me why a vaccine would have such a massive difference in efficacy in different age groups please

Younger people have stronger immune systems and generate stronger antibody generating immune responses to vaccines generally.

Van.Bosch

Indestructable wrote: »

It's still safe, just not much use.

True - shouldn’t have said safe. I mean though if it stopped you getting a Pfizer one for example, you’d feel hard done by!

JTMan

JTMan wrote: »

Assuming this is the case and the European Medicine Agency only approve Astrazeneca vaccine for under 65s later this week, I assume the HSE have to change the priority groups? Will 60-65 year olds be first to receive the AZ vaccine?

There's actually a good few groups ahead of that age group that it might be suitable for, we're only at about 50% of healthcare workers so far, there's key workers, younger people in residential homes, crowded accom. Also a big question about people under 65 with certain health conditions, who are ahead on the priority list.

Amirani

Cork2021 wrote: »

Can anyone explain this the ? Only a week ago...

https://twitter.com/germanyinmumbai/status/1351460371995889668?s=21

The overall efficacy levels could still be great, even if that's not the case for a specific age group. The reported figures so far suggest that this is a very efficacious vaccine.

Gael23

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Next EU meeting Wednesday

https://twitter.com/SKyriakidesEU/status/1353805555048075264?s=19

Any update from this evenings meeting?

stephenjmcd

Well then....
https://twitter.com/JeremyCliffe/status/1353809710596685825?s=19