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

Stark

Leo's a funny one. He's not a fan of zero-covid or extreme mandatory quarantine approaches so comes out with scary sounding strawmen like "forever border closures" and "armed guards outside hotel room doors". These then tend to get taken out of context and attributed as his actual viewpoints as opposed to the extreme scenario he's putting forward to scare people away.

As a friend of mine put it, this would be a typical Leo sounding quote: "'I'm fully in favour myself, but just so you know that it would involve some small babies being eaten."

Micky 32

hynesie08 wrote: »

Any chance of a link there?

Also he says I hope and I believe at least a dozen times in that holiday announcement.

Apologies no link. I read that in the paper. It was an interview with 2FM.

caveat emptor

Deathofcool wrote: »

AstraZenica vaccine has 'similar effect' against Kent variant, researchers find.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-oxfordastrazenica-vaccine-has-similar-effect-against-kent-variant-researchers-find-12209449

It's the S.A which has shown the immune escape. I think the E484K has now also evolved in the Kent variant. Convergent evolution means clear selection advantage. Think dolphins and sharks. Different species evolved the same shape independently as it's advantageous.

https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1353706396282474499?s=20

frozen3

Sanjuro wrote: »

There is little point in listening to a word this guy says. He is unbelievably inconsistent and I swear to god, I think he just makes up stuff on the spot.

No point him talking now anyway

If over 54s are all done and very few under 54 end up in hospital, crisis is over

Does he expect everyone to take it too?

Uptake wont be 100%, 80% will be impressive

That leaves 1 million+ carriers out there at all times

lbj666

lucernarian wrote: »

This is a contradiction. Either the data says that single doses are very effective (implying prioritisation of giving 1 dose to as many as possible is the more optimal plan) or "the data stretching out doses is non-existent for Pfizer/BioNTech" (implying it's a reckless gamble without evidence).

If single doses offer a large degree of protection, and the point of deferring a second dose is to alleviate shortages and give more people their first dose, then how is the data non-existent?

I don't see enough evidence for the former btw, just one paper has made a strong link with effectiveness after one dose and the manufacturers themselves do not consider it as viable, so far.

Contrary to the OP the data effectiveness after 1 dose for pfizer is out there. But plain and simply if the Pfizer dont change the label with recommended dosage intervals, which means EMA approval, staying true to form with the cautiousness regarding the AZ vacine we will not be derogating from the 3-4 week interval.

frozen3

caveat emptor wrote: »

It's the S.A which has shown the immune escape. I think the E484K has now also evolved in the Kent variant. Convergent evolution means clear selection advantage. Think dolphins and sharks. Different species evolved the same shape independently as it's advantageous.

https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1353706396282474499?s=20

Booster is bit misleading no?

Its a new vaccine at that stage, it will replace the old one.

E484K vs vaccine battle has begun

Have a feeling it will be cat and mouse for a long time

Anyway that guy loves the bad news, constant doom since Jan 2020

That's a week old tweet too btw

seamus

political analyst wrote: »

I'm surprised that the EU would trust vaccines made in either Russia or China, to be honest.

"If it meets certain criteria" is the key part in that message.

The EU outright rejecting the vaccines because of who made them, is a political statement. Setting out safety and regulatory criteria that will be near impossible for them to meet, is a public health statement.

On a positive note there must be a plan to open up travel within the country by summer as Leo said he’s booked a Sligo staycation this summer.

The government don't realistically have a plan beyond 5th March. Varadkar also recommended that if you do book, that you make sure that you can change it for free.

It would be unreasonable to expect that they know what's going to happen next and are booking hotels because they're certain travel will be possible. I'm sure informally they've discussed likely dates for level 3, 2, 1, etc. But they're not going to write that down when it's highly possible they'll have to change the dates. Because whatever dates they give will be used as a stick to beat them, either now or later.

So they have no choice but to continue saying they "hope" to able to be at a certain stage by some fuzzy date in the future. Anything else is just inviting complaints.

Le Bruise

Micky 32 wrote: »

Leo Varadkar:

“Even if Ireland hits zero cases, crowds at matches and concerts would still be banned” He added “We really need to get people vaccinated and that’s what it’s all about”

On a positive note there must be a plan to open up travel within the country by summer as Leo has said he’s booked a Sligo staycation this summer.

I assume he means no crowds until 70%-80% vaccinated, even if the cases hit zero (which they never would)? If he means no crowds, even after there's herd immunity through vaccinations...then I give up!!

lbj666

caveat emptor wrote: »

It's the S.A which has shown the immune escape. I think the E484K has now also evolved in the Kent variant. Convergent evolution means clear selection advantage. Think dolphins and sharks. Different species evolved the same shape independently as it's advantageous.

https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1353706396282474499?s=20

Discussed here at length two weeks ago, 6 x less of immune response didnt mean a 6x drop in efficacy, hence Pfizer/Moderna were saying slight drop in efficacy.

stephenjmcd

Icantthinkof1 wrote: »

190,000 is a fantastic amount! Have Ireland given any indication as to how long the 2nd AZ vaccine will be spaced out for?

Anywhere between 4-12 weeks. If ever used in over 70s between 4-6 weeks

timsey tiger

caveat emptor wrote: »

It's the S.A which has shown the immune escape. I think the E484K has now also evolved in the Kent variant. Convergent evolution means clear selection advantage. Think dolphins and sharks. Different species evolved the same shape independently as it's advantageous.

https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1353706396282474499?s=20

horizontal tail vs vertical tail, yeah they are the same all right.

Micky 32

Le Bruise wrote: »

I assume he means no crowds until 70%-80% vaccinated, even if the cases hit zero (which they never would)? If he means no crowds, even after there's herd immunity through vaccinations...then I give up!!

I know, it would be a wet dream for a certain couple of posters on here. Yeah i do think that he means until we are all vaccinated.

Micky 32

caveat emptor wrote: »

It's the S.A which has shown the immune escape. I think the E484K has now also evolved in the Kent variant. Convergent evolution means clear selection advantage. Think dolphins and sharks. Different species evolved the same shape independently as it's advantageous.

https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1353706396282474499?s=20

Old news, didn’t you already post this before along with all your other tons of contributions to the thread?

Either way the vaccine is still effective.

Multipass

Tyrone212 wrote: »

Partially vaccinated you mean going against the advice of those who made the vaccine just so they can boast about how many have been partially vaccinated.

Also your friends would be in their 50s then so you're obviously making that up unless they all work in hospitals.

How ridiculous - you think they’re doing one dose so they can ‘boast’. Try again, the approach right now is to give as many people as possible some protection, rather than leaving them wide open. It’s a more caring, community approach than that being taken here, where they will leave over 80s completely unprotected and give their vaccines to 60 year olds.

And my family members in the UK range from 50s to 80s, 2 Siblings in 50s are in health care (not hospital), were vaccinated 2 weeks ago. Eldest are in nursing homes and were vaccinated long ago. Several of them have already had Covid anyway.

JacksonHeightsOwn

Seeing as the AZ vaccine will not be given to the over 70's (for now), have the hse changed the timings on the rollout, will the over 65's be jumping the queue now, if you know what i mean?

Hmmzis

frozen3 wrote: »

Booster is bit misleading no?

Its a new vaccine at that stage, it will replace the old one.

E484K vs vaccine battle has begun

Have a feeling it will be cat and mouse for a long time

Anyway that guy loves the bad news, constant doom since Jan 2020

That's a week old tweet too btw

It is a booster, the overall differences are small. much smaller than you'd see between yearly flu shots. From what I was reading a week or two ago they will also look at a homologous booster (3rd shot of the existing vaccine) and how that affects the neutralizing AB response. The reasoning behind it is that giving the B cells another round of mutations with the same antigens could give an equivalently broad response than a heterologous shot.

Personally, I like the idea of heterologous boosters, makes the immune system more focused on the conserved viral bits that are important and gives a better chance for B cells to come up with broadly neutralizing antibodies against the changing parts.

frozen3

Multipass wrote: »

Try again, the approach right now is to give as many people as possible some protection, rather than leaving them wide open.

Take a bow

Best explanation i've seen here on what's going on

Absolutely 100% correct

Some protection is better than none

frozen3

Hmmzis wrote: »

It is a booster, the overall differences are small. much smaller than you'd see between yearly flu shots. From what I was reading a week or two ago they will also look at a homologous booster (3rd shot of the existing vaccine) and how that affects the neutralizing AB response. The reasoning behind it is that giving the B cells another round of mutations with the same antigens could give an equivalently broad response than a heterologous shot.

Personally, I like the idea of heterologous boosters, makes the immune system more focused on the conserved viral bits that are important and gives a better chance for B cells to come up with broadly neutralizing antibodies against the changing parts.

If its not a new vaccine will Moderna be a 3 shot vaccine now going forward?

Not 2 shot?

Micky 32

I like the RTE news app main headline. They must be in a good mood in there seeing it’s Friday

“EU hails Russian vaccine ‘good news for mankind’l

astrofool

political analyst wrote: »

This is from the Turkish state-run news agency Anadolu.

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/eu-is-open-to-buying-russian-chinese-vaccines-/2130239



I'm surprised that the EU would trust vaccines made in either Russia or China, to be honest.

The mention of anything made in a Russian lab reminds me of Salisbury.

If it's made in a Chinese lab, it reminds me of the intro to the 1970s post-apocalyptic TV drama series Survivors.

I think that's part of the EU production requirements, EU inspectors can oversee the whole process and ensure the quality of batches that are supplied to EU citizens, alternate is to have those inspectors on site in non-EU locations.

Really all that matters is that it's more vaccines available worldwide, this isn't a one country issue, it's all countries, the sooner we get jabs in arms the better, and the more vaccines available, the faster than can be, regardless of which country that arm resides.

is_that_so

Micky 32 wrote: »

I like the RTE news app main headline. They must be in a good mood in there seeing it’s Friday

“EU hails Russian vaccine ‘good news for mankind’l

It's quite probably what the man said. You can't have them making it up now, can you?

is_that_so

political analyst wrote: »

This is from the Turkish state-run news agency Anadolu.

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/eu-is-open-to-buying-russian-chinese-vaccines-/2130239



I'm surprised that the EU would trust vaccines made in either Russia or China, to be honest.

The mention of anything made in a Russian lab reminds me of Salisbury.

If it's made in a Chinese lab, it reminds me of the intro to the 1970s post-apocalyptic TV drama series Survivors.

It was its pre-emptive approval before trials had finished, to suit Putin's nostalgia for the USSR, which caused the concern. The EMA will do its job on it now.

Micky 32

is_that_so wrote: »

It's quite probably what the man said. You can't have them making it up now, can you?

Yup Josep Borrell himself

Hmmzis

frozen3 wrote: »

If its not a new vaccine will Moderna be a 3 shot vaccine now going forward?

Not 2 shot?

I think it would be two shots still, prime with the 'wild type' and boost with the 'mutant', unless you already had the two initial shots, then it becomes 3 in total.

frozen3

Hmmzis wrote: »

I think it would be two shots still, prime with the 'wild type' and boost with the 'mutant', unless you already had the two initial shots, then it becomes 3 in total.

Get you now

Makes sense, good way of doing it for future strains with that approach

conor_mc

frozen3 wrote: »

Take a bow

Best explanation i've seen here on what's going on

Absolutely 100% correct

Some protection is better than none

The thing is, we don’t actually know if some protection is in fact better than none. What if some (read, low) protection allows a variant to escape the vaccine? That’s the scientific concern about the UK approach. I don’t know if it well-founded or not, but it is important to recognise that there is a different perspective out there for good reason. Some people seem to think Fun Boris has it all right and the EU are just party-poopers!

Multipass

conor_mc wrote: »

The thing is, we don’t actually know if some protection is in fact better than none. What if some (read, low) protection allows a variant to escape the vaccine? That’s the scientific concern about the UK approach. I don’t know if it well-founded or not, but it is important to recognise that there is a different perspective out there for good reason. Some people seem to think Fun Boris has it all right and the EU are just party-poopers!

Alternatively the faster you get the whole population to have an antibody response, the less chance of variants evolving. I’m sure there are virologists in both camps.

conor_mc

Multipass wrote: »

Alternatively the faster you get the whole population to have an antibody response, the less chance of variants evolving. I’m sure there are virologists in both camps.

I’m sure there are. I think with sterilising immunity that outcome is more likely, but since the data didn’t back that up (until recently anyway) then the ‘safe’ perspective was always to stick with the tested regimen.

Roger_007

Multipass wrote: »

Alternatively the faster you get the whole population to have an antibody response, the less chance of variants evolving. I’m sure there are virologists in both camps.

If virtually the whole population is vaccinated how would the virus spread, much less evolve. Surely it would have nowhere to go?

lucernarian

seamus wrote: »

First dose is known to generate a protective immune response in X% of recipients.

Second dose given within a specific timeframe is known to generate a stronger immune response in X + Y% of recipients.

What we do know is that the value "X" is good. Very good, in fact, compared to many other vaccines.

What we don't know;

- Whether the immune response generated by the single dose remains protective beyond the timeframe
- Whether a second dose outside of this timeframe generates the stronger immune response, and in X + Y% of recipients.

The gamble here is that stretching out the doses will be effective over the medium to long-term when compared to the tested regimen.

That is data we don't have. The indications are good that it'll work out. But it's an unknown.

And where that falls apart is the fact we don't have data on the long term efficacy of *any* of the vaccine regimens.

What we *do* know is that there is no disease known where the same viral strain is reintroduced to a subject and it results in a weaker immune response to that second infection - in immunocompetent people at least. The corollary here being that X+Y isn't conceivably smaller based on a more time-spaced dosing profile.

The other issue is that we don't actually have good quality data about the efficacy of a single dose. One paper published saying no, and another paper claiming the opposite using the same data but corrected for mistakes by the first. And that data was a population study, not an RCT conducted by Pfizer/BioNTech.

So that's why I'm seeing a contradiction in what you said earlier.

Edit: I know Pfizer did investigate after one point in time with 1 dose, but efficacy was something like 52%?