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

What Username Guidelines

ACitizenErased wrote: »

This. Understatement of the year. This could change medicine forever.

It will take a while for this to sink in for most, even having followed the vaccine thread and expecting some news this month, I don't think it's sunk in for me. Especially as the news is far better than expected!

Stheno

What Username Guidelines wrote: »

It will take a while for this to sink in for most, even having followed the vaccine thread and expecting some news this month, I don't think it's sunk in for me. Especially as the news is far better than expected!

Same here, its almost "is this really happening?"
"Might this start to end in six months time?"

odyssey06

firemansam4 wrote: »

So can anyone "In the know" on these matters explain whether they are claiming that this vaccine actually stopped 90% of the candidates in the study from catching the disease at all, meaning that they would not have been contagious?
Or is it just that they didn't develop the severe symptoms but could still potentially spread covid?
Is sterilising immunity the correct word for it?

The scope of the trials would not track sterilising immunity.
"The results do not reflect complete or so-called sterilizing immunity against infection"
https://time.com/5909322/pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-effective/

These earlier tests on animals, assuming BNT162b2 is the same vaccine announcned today, did indicate that "macaques that had been challenged with the COVID-19 virus had no viral RNA in their lower respiratory tracts."
https://www.fiercebiotech.com/research/pfizer-biontech-report-strong-immune-response-animals-to-covid-19-mrna-vaccine-candidate

hmmm

Stheno wrote: »

I know this might sound ridiculous but Fauci backing these is very reassuring to me

Oh huge. We'll be relying on trusted people/organisations to increase public confidence in taking this vaccine.

speckle

firemansam4 wrote: »

So can anyone "In the know" on these matters explain whether they are claiming that this vaccine actually stopped 90% of the candidates in the study from catching the disease at all, meaning that they would not have been contagious?

Or is it just that they didn't develop the severe symptoms but could still potentially spread covid?

Is sterilising immunity the correct word for it?

I would like to know this also because correct me if I am wrong. If they dont regurarily test for antibodies Tcells etc of the participants how can they know of those who were asymtomatic etc? Do they take bloods regurarily and test them at the end for both of the above? Taking into account some may or may not be tested as close contacts during the trial depending on the country?
Edit.. thanks odessey06 just seen above and hmmm below

Some of my preferred hopes to come out of this whole situation is advances in T cell detection and issues regarding auto immunity etc and if anyone has some good links to research please let me know especially if Irish based. thanks

leahyl

Ah guys, can we not keep celebrating here instead of getting into arguments This is a momentous day in our struggle against this damn Covid! :pac:

hmmm

firemansam4 wrote: »

So can anyone "In the know" on these matters explain whether they are claiming that this vaccine actually stopped 90% of the candidates in the study from catching the disease at all, meaning that they would not have been contagious?

Or is it just that they didn't develop the severe symptoms but could still potentially spread covid?

Is sterilising immunity the correct word for it?

That's not clear yet. This was a press release, not official data. That was to be expected, they said they would release news as soon as they had some.

From reading the Press Release it says "Vaccine candidate was found to be more than 90% effective in preventing COVID-19". Covid is the disease caused by the SARS-CoV2 virus. So my reading (which might be very wrong) is that they are talking about the disease, but not the virus infection - which means herd immunity will be important and it's not good enough simply to vaccinate the vulnerable.

stephenjmcd

hmmm wrote: »

https://twitter.com/C_Barraud/status/1325815206698737667

I have to laugh that on the same day, Russia now also claim that their vaccine is more than 90% effective

funnydoggy

Fergal Bowers in with the "it's way too early" shtick.

Well done RTE you miserable bastards.

is_that_so

is_that_so wrote: »

Nah, not a bit. I'll leave you with some study material! It's always good to learn new things.:)

https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/geriatric_1

Not engaging. post reported.

Doc07

firemansam4 wrote: »

So can anyone "In the know" on these matters explain whether they are claiming that this vaccine actually stopped 90% of the candidates in the study from catching the disease at all, meaning that they would not have been contagious?

Or is it just that they didn't develop the severe symptoms but could still potentially spread covid?

Is sterilising immunity the correct word for it?

No the results, promising g as they are, don’t show that and the trial is not designed to demonstrate that. The cases were lab test positive Covid infections. They performed an interim analysis at a point where 94 people in the study had reached an event ie a Covid infection. Then they compared those who had vaccine versus those who received placebo. Most of the infections had occurred in those who had received placebo and very few in those who received vaccine among the 94. That’s what the 90% efficacy refers to. Not the full trial population.

ShineOn7

funnydoggy wrote: »

Fergal Bowers in with the "it's way too early" shtick.

Well done RTE you miserable bastards.

Unfollow them. Stop watching them. Stop listening to them. Stop giving them clicks

Unless you're over 65/don't know how to work the Internet/only have RTE as your TV options then no one should be giving these bástards attention anymore

Unless it's to mock them

They'll be at parody levels of comedy by January, if they're not there already

Stheno

funnydoggy wrote: »

Fergal Bowers in with the "it's way too early" shtick.

Well done RTE you miserable bastards.

Maybe his sources in the HSE/government are telling him they've no plan to roll it out?

NIMAN

If this news is accurate then it's great and bodes well for the next 6 months.

However I got to wondering how this will be administered?

Will it be made mandatory? I'm sure the authorities would want everyone immunized eventually but there will be many who won't want to take it.

I suppose if it's given to the old, compromised etc first then it might allow the rest of society more freedom to function, even if everyone isn't vaccinated.

sideswipe

Somewhere Paddygreen is sitting with his hand hovering over a keyboard with a killer line about this monumental day in his head that he can’t post

is_that_so

funnydoggy wrote: »

Fergal Bowers in with the "it's way too early" shtick.

Well done RTE you miserable bastards.

They have a cautiously optimistic story as well. Much better reading.

https://www.rte.ie/news/newslens/2020/1109/1176954-vaccine-reax/

hmmm

RTE might be in one of these "let's dampen down enthusiasm in case everyone runs out to lick doorknobs" modes. Which is fair enough, but people need a bit of a lift.

Better in my view to say that we have at least one vaccine, it bodes well for other vaccines, and let's try to prevent people getting the virus when we can see light at the end of the tunnel. It'd be good to match this up with the government doubling down on support for affected businesses.

Good thread here (also some interesting observations on side effects):
https://twitter.com/eliowa/status/1325832197589315586

is_that_so

NIMAN wrote: »

If this news is accurate then it's great and bodes well for the next 6 months.

However I got to wondering how this will be administered?

Will it be made mandatory? I'm sure the authorities would want everyone immunized eventually but there will be many who won't want to take it.

I suppose if it's given to the old, compromised etc first then it might allow the rest of society more freedom to function, even if everyone isn't vaccinated.

Why do you imagine there will be many who won't take it? Outside the priority groups it will be quite a while after before it's available to everyone else.

speckle

Stheno wrote: »

Maybe his sources in the HSE/government are telling him they've no plan to roll it out?

relative 80s high risk in the big smoke... still has to wait till end of month for influenza one from gp. My view is ....

ShineOn7

Matt Cooper weighing in now to hundreds of thousands of listeners on Today FM with "we're not there yet with this, are we?" and "what about side effects?"

Switched him off and I won't be back, I probably should've known better

I mean, of course we're not there yet. It's not here yet

But there's something genuinely wrong with how a large amount of the Irish media have portrayed everything since March

ACitizenErased

ShineOn7 wrote: »

Matt Cooper weighing in now to hundreds of thousands of listeners on Today FM with "we're not there yet with this, are we?" and "what about side effects?"

Switched him off and I won't be back, I probably should've known better

I mean, of course we're not there yet. It's not here yet

But there's something genuinely wrong with how a large amount of the Irish media have portrayed everything since March

I hope lessons are learnt - independent journalism is the way forward.

is_that_so

ShineOn7 wrote: »

Matt Cooper weighing in now to hundreds of thousands of listeners on Today FM with "we're not there yet with this, are we?" and "what about side effects?"

Switched him off and I won't be back, I probably should've known better

I mean, of course we're not there yet. It's not here yet

But there's something genuinely wrong with how a large amount of the Irish media have portrayed everything since March

TBF they are looking for other angles to explore but they should be covering the news first.

Gael23

ACitizenErased wrote: »

https://twitter.com/newschambers/status/1325825561302806529?s=20

I think that might be a bit ambitious.

That said. Its my 30th Birthday the end of April and im hoping to have a proper party

ACitizenErased

Gael23 wrote: »

I think that might be a bit ambitious.

That said. Its my 30th Birthday the end of April and im hoping to have a proper party

i better be feckin invited

Gael23

ACitizenErased wrote: »

i better be feckin invited

We should have a thread meetup at some point!

ACitizenErased

Gael23 wrote: »

We should have a thread meetup at some point!

I'd probably get my face kicked in

D.Q

sideswipe wrote: »

Somewhere Paddygreen is sitting with his hand hovering over a keyboard with a killer line about this monumental day in his head that he can’t post

You think it's a coincidence that he was banned and now suddenly there's a vaccine??? WAKE UP SHEEPLE

ShineOn7

is_that_so wrote: »

TBF they are looking for other angles to explore but they should be covering the news first.

He's playing devil's advocate to garner conversation. I get that

But he has repeatedly taken a negative stance on things since March. You can almost hear in his voice at times that he's just stirring shíte for ratings. Which, of course, he is!

funnydoggy

ACitizenErased wrote: »

I hope lessons are learnt - independent journalism is the way forward.

Great suggestion . Who do you follow?

funnydoggy

Gael23 wrote: »

I think that might be a bit ambitious.

That said. Its my 30th Birthday the end of April and im hoping to have a proper party

Still up for that party