Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

deeperlearning

Well, if a semi-literate twitter account makes the claim then it must be true.:pac:

revelman

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Summary - they're all doing the same thing in the real world outside of trials. The theory that one is better than the other is being disproven

Precisely right. So much misinformation about one vaccine being “better” than the other.

Real world studies are what matter.

New real world study showing that over 9 in 10 people develop antibodies after first dose of either Pfizer or AZ. This rises to almost 100% after second dose.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/18/96-of-britons-develop-antibodies-after-one-covid-jab-study-finds

Study suggests that people with immune system problems may not have as good a response after first dose but have a good response after second dose of both vaccines.

If you are over 50 and in Cohort 4 or 7, AZ is just as good a vaccine to get as Pfizer.

Qrt

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Not necessarily true, people are highly misinterpreting efficiency and that's probably due to media coverage.

https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/1391775828904751108?s=19

AZ also performing just as good as Pfizer in real world

https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/1392896775942443013?s=19

Summary - they're all doing the same thing in the real world outside of trials. The theory that one is better than the other is being disproven as more data comes in through various studies

Hopefully we see more about Janssen, I’m a bit iffy a out that one because the UK haven’t approved it yet.

stephenjmcd

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Not necessarily true, people are highly misinterpreting efficiency and that's probably due to media coverage.

https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/1391775828904751108?s=19

AZ also performing just as good as Pfizer in real world

https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/1392896775942443013?s=19

Summary - they're all doing the same thing in the real world outside of trials. The theory that one is better than the other is being disproven as more data comes in through various studies

That refers to severe disease and death,they're all good at that
I'd rather not get sick at all though,as depressed immune system people get sicker quicker and longer than healthy people,thats why I got an Rna vaccine
Whats disconcerting is no vaccine has data on splenectomy patients that I can find

Qrt wrote: »

Hopefully we see more about Janssen, I’m a bit iffy a out that one because the UK haven’t approved it yet.

And the USA havent approved Astra yet

stephenjmcd

Qrt wrote: »

Hopefully we see more about Janssen, I’m a bit iffy a out that one because the UK haven’t approved it yet.

Will take a little longer to get the real world numbers in for sure. The states should be the first to have something concrete outside of trials

stephenjmcd

Marine Layer wrote: »

That refers to severe disease and death

If you read the various studies they refer to both symptomatic & asymptomatic infection also.

Recently published South Korean study based on 521,133 participants undertaken by Korean Disease Control and Prevention Agency

Pfizer 89.7% effective in preventing infection at least two weeks after a first dose was given, while the AstraZeneca shot was 86.0% effective.

As shown there's little difference between the two

Goldengirl

stephenjmcd wrote: »

If you read the various studies they refer to both symptomatic & asymptomatic infection also.

Recently published South Korean study based on 521,133 participants undertaken by Korean Disease Control and Prevention Agency

Pfizer 89.7% effective in preventing infection at least two weeks after a first dose was given, while the AstraZeneca shot was 86.0% effective.

As shown there's little difference between the two

While nobody disputes this , and the results are great , I think that poster has some pretty specific questions that will not be answered anytime soon by real world data ,so he is right to go with his doctor's recommendation .

I would say the number of immune compromised patients with splenectomy is a very select group , and we will be well past these first round of vaccinations before anybody has any idea which or if any of the vaccines works best for these patients .

Cloudio9

Def_IRL wrote: »

You can register right now. Just choose the 50-69 year old selection box and work through it and you will get confirmation at the end that you are registered for an appointment,/date pending etc.
It will accept any DoB older than 1976, anything DoB younger than. 1976 it won't let you register

Portal is updated now to allow you to select age 45-69.

stephenjmcd

Goldengirl wrote: »

While nobody disputes this , and the results are great , I think that poster has some pretty specific questions that will not be answered anytime soon by real world data ,so he is right to go with his doctor's recommendation .

I would say the number of immune compromised patients with splenectomy is a very select group , and we will be well past these first round of vaccinations before anybody has any idea which or if any of the vaccines works best for these patients .

Of course if your doctor recommends something for you then your going to go on their recommendation.

However, I was purely replying to the fact that the poster was alluding to the fact that they picked the vaccine with higher efficency etc which is what I was addressing.

In that posters situation there isn't any known studies so far on that specific issue relating to any of the vaccines

Zico !

Bowers saying people over 45 getting phfizer or moderna is that correct

Hellrazer

Cloudio9 wrote: »

Portal is updated now to allow you to select age 45-69.

And registered!!!

JPup

Zico ! wrote: »

Bowers saying people over 45 getting phfizer or moderna is that correct

Yes, but not exclusively.

deeperlearning

Qrt wrote: »

Hopefully we see more about Janssen, I’m a bit iffy a out that one because the UK haven’t approved it yet.

I would have little confidence in the UK and its regulator.

When countries in Europe reported that blood clots occurred after the AstraZeneca vaccine, the UK implied that it was an EU plot to discredit their vaccine. It took quite a while for the UK to acknowledge that recipients in the UK had also experienced blood clots.

franciscanpunk

not to get ahead of ourselves but you would hope that after the 40 plus are done they can just open the application system to all and also have pharmacies involved . long long way to go yet i know.

hopefully no restrictions either, just sn opt in system in that if i, 32 male, see a suitable slot in the local pharma or mvc for a vaccine in july or whenever i can just book the slot and not be waiting on being assigned one. i think 39 and under the age bssed risk profile of prioritising vaccines is a lot less relevant.

i tend to agree with earlier posters though that we will be very dissapoined when we see we got nowhere the 600k jansen vaccines ee are due. if the deliveries are meet it would fill such a gap and i would be extremely dissapointed if we at least give people the option to take them regardless of age

Qrt

deeperlearning wrote: »

I would have little confidence in the UK and its regulator.

When countries in Europe reported that blood clots occurred after the AstraZeneca vaccine, the UK implied that it was an EU plot to discredit their vaccine. It took quite a while for the UK to acknowledge that recipients in the UK had also experienced blood clots.

Oh, I should have clarified. I just want to go to England and not get caught out because I don't have an "approved" vaccine or otherwise.

Charles Babbage

Qrt wrote: »

Hopefully we see more about Janssen, I’m a bit iffy a out that one because the UK haven’t approved it yet.

As far as I am aware Janssen haven't applied for approval in the UK, as they cannot fulfil demand elsewhere there is no point getting it approved.

bodhrandude

Rebelbrowser wrote: »

As a 44 year old born in 1976 that's very interesting.....

That year was one of the hottest summers on record, 3 and half months of sunshine bliss.

Cole

A relieved and happy 49 year old here...just registered. I'd have taken any of them, but to be honest I'm happy to get an MRNA vaccine. Placing in the race and getting a medal is always good, but it always feels better to get the gold (or maybe silver).

Good luck to everyone else (all ages). They'll all do the job.

naughtysmurf

My mrs is 50 & has been offered Janssen & she is considering not accepting due to the lower efficacy & the clotting issue but more so the lower efficacy & waiting for a nMRA option, any thoughts on how long that wait may be? If it was only a couple of months max, I’d say she may wait


She’s working from home & at very low risk of getting infected herself only goes out to walk the mutt

EDit

In the absence of head to head randomised studies (which are unlikely to ever happen) you can’t say vaccine x has a higher/lower efficacy than vaccine y. I work on clinical trial data daily as part of my job and cross-study comparisons (which is what everyone is doing with these vaccines, especially the media) are a big no-no. Real-world data are key and, as far as i am aware, they suggest that there is little difference between the vaccines (at least for the AZ, Pfizer and Moderna ones... may be too early for real-world data on JnJ)

iamwhoiam

Cole wrote: »

A relieved and happy 49 year old here...just registered. I'd have taken any of them, but to be honest I'm happy to get an MRNA vaccine. Placing in the race and getting a medal is always good, but it always feels better to get the gold (or maybe silver).

Good luck to everyone else (all ages). They'll all do the job.

I have to say I felt like I had won gold simply by getting a vaccine at all

Happydays2020

naughtysmurf wrote: »

My mrs is 50 & has been offered Janssen & she is considering not accepting due to the lower efficacy & the clotting issue but more so the lower efficacy & waiting for a nMRA option, any thoughts on how long that wait may be? If it was only a couple of months max, I’d say she may wait


She’s working from home & at very low risk of getting infected herself only goes out to walk the mutt

No idea how long she will have to wait. She will need to ask HSE but they may be cagey also.

I would guess not more than a few months but bear in mind JJ is one shot - vaccinated after 14 days. Pfizer is two. Two shots 4 weeks apart and vaccinated 14 days after the second shot.

Bridge93

Do we have any rough figures as to where we are with the rollout? Obviously the system can't update at the minute. Trying to get a sense of whether the pace is continuing to pick up

At least one lady I know,mid 50's who should have been vaccinated by now but is waiting for the 40 to 45 bracket to open first... before registering
Does this happen often

JPup

naughtysmurf wrote: »

My mrs is 50 & has been offered Janssen & she is considering not accepting due to the lower efficacy & the clotting issue but more so the lower efficacy & waiting for a nMRA option, any thoughts on how long that wait may be? If it was only a couple of months max, I’d say she may wait


She’s working from home & at very low risk of getting infected herself only goes out to walk the mutt

I wouldn’t worry about the efficacy issue too much. One shot of Janssen will give as good protection as one shot of the others and she can get a booster shot in a few months to top up.

The blood clot issue is something she should ask about. I think the odds are somewhere between 1 in 100,000 and 1 in 1 million so very low, but not zero either.

naughtysmurf

naughtysmurf wrote: »

My mrs is 50 & has been offered Janssen & she is considering not accepting due to the lower efficacy & the clotting issue but more so the lower efficacy & waiting for a nMRA option, any thoughts on how long that wait may be? If it was only a couple of months max, I’d say she may wait


She’s working from home & at very low risk of getting infected herself only goes out to walk the mutt

If shes healthy with no underlying conditions,I'd advise taking the j&j
We'll all be getting pfizer next year anyway by the looks of things

To put it in perspective Vicky Phelan,the cervical cancer victim and campaigner took the j&j vaccine
She is in the states getting treatment and at very high risk,yet is out and about there in a highish covid environment compared to Ireland

Cole

EDit wrote: »

Real-world data are key and, as far as i am aware, they suggest that there is little difference between the vaccines (at least for the AZ, Pfizer and Moderna ones... may be too early for real-world data on JnJ)

iamwhoiam wrote: »

I have to say I felt like I had won gold simply by getting a vaccine at all

Complete armchair opinion here (but I do try to stay as informed as I can), but I guess my medal metaphor was based on perceptions too. If you put the 4 vaccines on a table in front of someone and said "take your pick", I'm pretty confident that the vast majority would go for Pfizer (although some would opt for the convenience of the one shot J&J).

I do take the point about the efficacy and real world data and even with my almost non-existent knowledge of this area, I have that same sense of things. If I ended up with not with no choice, I'd hope for AZ over J&J because of the real world data point...but would still prefer the MRNA.

revelman

Cole wrote: »

A relieved and happy 49 year old here...just registered. I'd have taken any of them, but to be honest I'm happy to get an MRNA vaccine. Placing in the race and getting a medal is always good, but it always feels better to get the gold (or maybe silver).

Good luck to everyone else (all ages). They'll all do the job.

I think we will find that it will have been a photo finish at the end of this pandemic. We cannot say now who has won the gold medal.

Cole

revelman wrote: »

I think we will find that it will have been a photo finish at the end of this pandemic. We cannot say now who has won the gold medal.

Fair point.

revelman

Cole wrote: »

Complete armchair opinion here (but I do try to stay as informed as I can), but I guess my medal metaphor was based on perceptions too. If you put the 4 vaccines on a table in front of someone and said "take your pick", I'm pretty confident that the vast majority would go for Pfizer (although some would opt for the convenience of the one shot J&J).

I do take the point about the efficacy and real world data and even with my almost non-existent knowledge of this area, I have that same sense of things. If I ended up with not with no choice, I'd go for AZ over J&J because of the real world data point...but would still prefer the MRNA.

Studies have shown that the T Cell response is 2.5 times higher in AZ than Pfizer: https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/373/bmj.n979.full.pdf

T Cell response might be the best indicator for long term immunity.

You might be right that people would pick “the Pfizer”. But we have had media in Ireland that have been harping on about efficacy rates from trial data without understanding the nuances so it is understandable that people will go for “the Pfizer”.