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

stephenjmcd

Gael23 wrote: »

Was the projected amount of doses available based on full dose/half dose? Now that 2 full doses are needed that would presumably mean less people can be covered

No it was normal dosing, the half dose full dose was found by mistake.

The UK briefing is suggesting based on data it doesn't seem to matter if its half dose full dose or full dose x2, what seems to matter is the time in between but they've more data on FD/FD so its the approved one.

odyssey06

Micky 32 wrote: »

The vaccines do a lot more than just lessening the symptoms. They prevent the vaccinated getting the disease. Yes it maybe possible you could carry it but some are saying it could reduce transmission. But if you want to social distance for the rest of your life be my guest
It might take until the last part of 2021 but normality is on it’s way.

They dont necessarily prevent you getting the disease... they were primarily tested for prevention of illness - which is not the same as prevention of infection.

If you are going to make a claim like this for all vaccines provide a source.

AdamD

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/1344245100810010625

statesaver

So, how many received the jab yesterday in Ireland ?

VG31

AdamD wrote: »

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/1344245100810010625

Were the EMA not saying only yesterday that they didn't expect to be able to approve it in January?

namloc1980

AdamD wrote: »

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/1344245100810010625

EMA said yesterday they don't expect to approve it in January and that AstraZenica hasn't even filled the necessary paperwork yet to get the ball rolling.

Stark

VG31 wrote: »

Were the EMA not saying only yesterday that they didn't expect to be able to approve it in January?

They can't do anything until Astrazenaca actually asks for approval and it doesn't look like that has happened yet. They have been doing a rolling review of the data so they should be able to move quickly once Astrazenaca actually makes the submission.

stephenjmcd

AdamD wrote: »

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/1344245100810010625

Whenever the application comes it'll probably be fairly quick in terms of approval, 2 or 3 weeks probably is a good guess but at the end of the day the application hasn't come yet so their hands are tied.

Germany were the ones who were most vocal about Pfizer & BioNTech approval so expect the same again

stephenjmcd

namloc1980 wrote: »

EMA said yesterday they don't expect to approve it in January and that AstraZenica hasn't even filled the necessary paperwork yet to get the ball rolling.

The rolling reviews are underway so they're submitting data alright, they've not submitted the required quality data yet according to the EMA. Even when they do submit it they'll have to apply for conditional marketing authorisation so that application rests with AZ&Oxford

Micky 32

odyssey06 wrote: »

They dont necessarily prevent you getting the disease... they were primarily tested for prevention of illness - which is not the same as prevention of infection.

If you are going to make a claim like this for all vaccines provide a source.

The reason the vaccines prevent illness is because the vaccine prevent the virus penetrating the cells which in turn prevents the actual disease. That’s what i’m talking about.

Yes you can still be infected and possible spread it but some studies ( even posters on here) have pointed out there may be evidence transmission would be reduced also. Once most of the population are vaccinated in the second or third part of the year it shouldn’t be a problem. Now you wouldn’t be trying to promote lifelong restrictions would you? :rolleyes:

The government have said the summer onwards we could see normality.

Gile_na_gile

The data that underlie the 8-12wk 90% efficacy are not yet public, only shared directly with MHRA at present. Different subset from 62% in Lancet with 4-6wk gap.
I suspect the 3 month gap between Pfizer doses is probably journalistic confusion with AZ news.
The UK is already decided to try beating down current wave with twin approach in earnest. Plus the MHRA are more proactive in going to vaccine makers directly.

titan18

VG31 wrote: »

Were the EMA not saying only yesterday that they didn't expect to be able to approve it in January?

I'd imagine that's the Germans putting pressure on EMA/AstraZeneca to get if sorted

stephenjmcd

Gile_na_gile wrote: »

The data that underlie the 8-12wk 90% efficacy are not yet public, only shared directly with MHRA at present. Different subset from 62% in Lancet with 4-6wk gap.
I suspect the 3 month gap between Pfizer doses is probably journalistic confusion with AZ news.
The UK is already decided to try beating down current wave with twin approach in earnest. Plus the MHRA are more proactive in going to vaccine makers directly.

Its not journalistic confusion, UK briefing clarified it earlier. They've changed the dosing regime to at least 21 days after first dose and at most 12 weeks and Pfizer responded accordingly by saying this is what we recommend but up to each regulator to do as they see fit

odyssey06

Micky 32 wrote: »

The reason the vaccines prevent illness is because the vaccine prevent the virus penetrating the cells which in turn cause the actual disease. That’s what i’m talking about.

Yes you can still be infected and possible spread it but some studies ( even posters on here) have pointed out there may be evidence transmission would be reduced also. Now you wouldn’t be trying to promote lifelong restrictions would you? :rolleyes:

Ok that wasnt clear from your first post but clearer now.

Not sure what the connection is between asking you to clarify you use of infection, illness, disease and transmission in relation to the vaccines... and some strawman about lifelong restrictions.

Micky 32

odyssey06 wrote: »

Not sure what the connection is between asking you to clarify you use of infection, illness, disease and transmission in relation to the vaccines... and some strawman about lifelong restrictions.

Can you read? I just explained it. It was a simple question, are you thinking social distancing for the forseeable future even post vaccine?

SARS-coV-2 is the actual virus and the vaccine prevents the actual Covid-19 disease. It’s not correct to say the vaccines just “lessen” symptoms.

WoollyRedHat

Latest research from Canada suggests it's best to administrate as many doses as fast as possible rather than reserve doses.

'Ashleigh Tuite, an epidemiologist at U of T’s Dalla Lana School of Public Health who worked on the new modelling, said she and her colleagues projected that frontloading vaccine doses would avert between 34 and 42 per cent more symptomatic coronavirus infections, compared with a strategy of keeping half the shipments in reserve.

“It makes much more sense to just get as many people their first doses as soon as possible,” Dr. Tuite said.'

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-new-data-favour-administering-covid-19-vaccines-as-fast-as-possible/

JimmyVik

How many Irish people were vaccinated yesterday?

MerlinSouthDub

titan18 wrote: »

I'd imagine that's the Germans putting pressure on EMA/AstraZeneca to get if sorted

And they are quite right to do so. No sense of urgency from EMA at all.

irishgeo

JimmyVik wrote: »

How many Irish people were vaccinated yesterday?

Nobody knows except the HSE and they haven't released any figures?

Harpon

Stark wrote: »

They can't do anything until Astrazenaca actually asks for approval and it doesn't look like that has happened yet. They have been doing a rolling review of the data so they should be able to move quickly once Astrazenaca actually makes the submission.

The fact that they could have applied for approval a long time ago and still haven’t speaks volumes, they are obviously waiting for the UK to complete their vaccination program before applying for approval in other countries.

jackboy

MerlinSouthDub wrote: »

And they are quite right to do so. No sense of urgency from EMA at all.

The EMA are not set up for a pandemic, it’s not that they are aren't trying. In normal times they are extremely risk averse, for good reasons. However, in a pandemic that will kill people. Calculated risks are required. Even that may kill people. Basically the EMA is an organisation with an extreme arse covering culture.

Melanchthon

namloc1980 wrote: »

EMA said yesterday they don't expect to approve it in January and that AstraZenica hasn't even filled the necessary paperwork yet to get the ball rolling.

Made this post in now locked thread but relevant here to this.

I am fairly sure that Ireland could approve the Oxford-Astrazenca vaccine independently earlier than the EU as a whole.
Remember when the British politician said the quicker approval of the Pfizer vaccine was a Brexit dividend there was a fair few commentators talking about how they were actually using emergency approval system that's allowed in the EU.

https://www.theguardia...val-of-covid-vaccine

Ireland not following this path is a choice.

I am seriously worried they are going to mess up this phase in Ireland as they are in love with locking down certain sectors, look at the attitude to testing and contact tracing and so on.
Also they need to bring in more people/systems to administer the vaccine, in the UK they are drawing from St Johns ambulance and other organisations, not to be flippant but giving an injection isn't rocket science (think of heroin addicts) restricting those capable of administration to only GP's and fully qualified pharmacists is going to either be far too slow or place a huge strain on already busy people.

Harpon

Melanchthon wrote: »

Made this post in now locked thread but relevant here to this.

I am fairly sure that Ireland could approve the Oxford-Astrazenca vaccine independently earlier than the EU as a whole.
Remember when the British politician said the quicker approval of the Pfizer vaccine was a Brexit dividend there was a fair few commentators talking about how they were actually using emergency approval system that's allowed in the EU.

https://www.theguardia...val-of-covid-vaccine

Ireland not following this path is a choice.

I am seriously worried they are going to mess up this phase in Ireland as they are in love with locking down certain sectors, look at the attitude to testing and contact tracing and so on.
Also they need to bring in more people/systems to administer the vaccine, in the UK they are drawing from St Johns ambulance and other organisations, not to be flippant but giving an injection isn't rocket science (think of heroin addicts) restricting those capable of administration to only GP's and fully qualified pharmacists is going to either be far too slow or place a huge strain on already busy people.

Ireland can’t approve it because AstraZeneca haven’t applied for approval.

stephenjmcd

Melanchthon wrote: »

Made this post in now locked thread but relevant here to this.

I am fairly sure that Ireland could approve the Oxford-Astrazenca vaccine independently earlier than the EU as a whole.
Remember when the British politician said the quicker approval of the Pfizer vaccine was a Brexit dividend there was a fair few commentators talking about how they were actually using emergency approval system that's allowed in the EU.

https://www.theguardia...val-of-covid-vaccine

Ireland not following this path is a choice.

I am seriously worried they are going to mess up this phase in Ireland as they are in love with locking down certain sectors, look at the attitude to testing and contact tracing and so on.
Also they need to bring in more people/systems to administer the vaccine, in the UK they are drawing from St Johns ambulance and other organisations, not to be flippant but giving an injection isn't rocket science (think of heroin addicts) restricting those capable of administration to only GP's and fully qualified pharmacists is going to either be far too slow or place a huge strain on already busy people.

Any country can approve a vaccine for use. The UK didn't get to approve it quicker because of brexit.

The issue is the UK isn't part of the EU purchasing of vaccines, they have their own supply contract.

Until the EMA approve a vaccine the EU doesn't get its supply of said vaccine as far as I'm aware. The EU countries signed into the agreement and knew what the process was. At the end of the day theres nothing for the EMA to approve as there's no application in.

If you've your own contact fire away but we don't.

Duke of Url

Ireland should simply negotiate its own Contract with AstraZeneca outside of the EU as well as get it within the EU scheme.

redt0m

https://www.breakingnews.ie/world/california-nurse-tests-positive-over-a-week-after-receiving-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-abc-1057090.html

For anyone imagining the vaccines will sort everything out, they will, eventally, but we have to allow time for them to do their job.

Micky 32

redt0m wrote: »

https://www.breakingnews.ie/world/california-nurse-tests-positive-over-a-week-after-receiving-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-abc-1057090.html

For anyone imagining the vaccines will sort everything out, they will, eventally, but we have to allow time for them to do their job.

I have seen it mentioned an average of 28 days.

stephenjmcd

redt0m wrote: »

https://www.breakingnews.ie/world/california-nurse-tests-positive-over-a-week-after-receiving-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-abc-1057090.html

For anyone imagining the vaccines will sort everything out, they will, eventally, but we have to allow time for them to do their job.

Sounds as if he was probably already infected when he got the vaccine and if not picked it up quite soon after.

Definitely not enough time for an immune response

ACitizenErased

redt0m wrote: »

https://www.breakingnews.ie/world/california-nurse-tests-positive-over-a-week-after-receiving-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-abc-1057090.html

For anyone imagining the vaccines will sort everything out, they will, eventally, but we have to allow time for them to do their job.

A week after getting it? Not even close to having protection. First dose gives max 50% protection after 3 weeks.



Why is this in the news???

Same as flu vaccine. Does not take effect until after 2-3 weeks.