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

Stark

Stark wrote: »

Interesting that of the two dosing regimes, the half dose followed by full dose performed better than two full doses.

It seems the first dose teaches the body how to attack the viral vector too well, so this reduces the impact of the second dose. Great that they had planned for this outcome and had structured their study to take account of this possibility.

ddarcy

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Because its not being seen as great news for some reason as the headline is 70% efficacious, despite 90% being seen. Markets comparing v moderna and Pfizer announcements.

Alot to do with how certain media elements are reporting it.

Also AZ is looking to break even/ not profit from it. From their point of view it’s to get their name out there. So the market could be seeking that this may in effect lose them money if better solutions are out there.

timsey tiger

Deleted User wrote: »

If they are using statistical confidence statements to establish these numbers, which they probably are, that suggests for 95% confidence that 3 of 94 initial infections were in the vaccine group and 3 of the 164 final total were in the vaccine group

They started the trials from 1 week after the second dose. I wonder if the full protective effect of the vaccine had come into play at that point. It would be really interesting to know the time of infection in the vaccinated group, given that the percentage increased.

If this is so then the might increase further as time goes on.

However, the numbers of vaccinated that became infected are really small, so it could just be chance at this stage. One or two infections would push it back down again.

Russman

Feels like a good news day alright.
I really hope our task force are able to pull out all the stops and get a workable plan together. With 3 vaccines now shown to work and hopefully to be approved shortly, we could be looking at massive monthly numbers for vaccination in the new year.

lbj666

glasso wrote: »

it's all a bit of a mess though

*up to 90% effective

not the sort of asterix-ed claim you want when you're going for a coronavirus vaccine is it?

the Moderna one is the most expensive one but also seems to have the best efficacy and reasonably easy (compared to the Pfizer one) in terms of storage - one month at fridge temperature

I suppose that we should be grateful that there are options out there with such high efficacy but I'd rather be getting the one with highest efficacy

also the Astrazenna one uses a Chimpanzee cold-virus as its delivery mechanism. the mRNA ones seem less likely to produce side-effects as they are not using a live virus to produce a response.

If the pricier mRNAs vacines meant somewhat normalilty even weeks sooner than Oxford (not suggesting it would though), cost wont come into it. Costs would pale in comparison to how much restrictions are damaging western economies.

It's be a good idea if they started assigning people a vaccine priority group now. Say Group 1 could be over 85s, nursing home patients, nursing home staff and healthcare workers that treat covid patients. Group 2 could be over 75s and other healthcare hospital workers. And so on until Group 10 which is general adult population under 40 and in good health.

How you could work it is once 70% of group 1 is done, you start vaccines in group 2 and continue them in group 1. Then you hit 70% in group 2 and move to group 3 and so on until you are covering all groups.

Would keep a steady flow going and give people a bit of reassurance as to when they can expect the chance to get a vaccine.

Westernworld.

What is the risk from the mink and the virus mutating in general?

Can the vaccines be rendered ineffective?

lbj666

lbj666 wrote: »

If the pricier mRNAs vacines meant somewhat normalilty even weeks sooner than Oxford (not suggesting it would though), cost wont come into it. Costs would pale in comparison to how much restrictions are damaging western economies.

you're correct in that but costs always come into it!

Stark

The "expensive" ones were like €40 per dose or thereabouts. Absolute pittance compared to what we're spending on keeping the economy in sleep mode, ICU costs, PPE in hospitals etc.

Hmmzis

Westernworld. wrote: »

What is the risk from the mink and the virus mutating in general?

Can the vaccines be rendered ineffective?

The mink variant was a concern but not a big one for vaccines, I think we'll see some data on this soon enough. It was a bigger concern for convalescent (recovered from wild type infection) people and monoclonal antibody treatments.

The overall mutation rate of the virus so far has been rather low. Some changes have been observed that are of interest but they don't seem to provide any fitness advantages. The 614G change in the spike improved infectivity to some degree, but at the same time it made the virus easier to be neutralized.

Deeper Blue

Was I the only one terrified that the vaccines would all fail?

I'm an optimist but that was always in the back of my mind

It's such a relief that they've all shown such great efficacy

Happy days

timsey tiger

Stark wrote: »

The "expensive" ones were like €40 per dose or thereabouts. Absolute pittance compared to what we're spending on keeping the economy in sleep mode, ICU costs, PPE in hospitals etc.

Cost isn't the limiting factor here, it's availability. 70% with no severe cases, wouldn't shake a stick at it at all, in the morning.

tobefrank321

Its going to be fascinating to see how society opens up once covid vaccines become common place.

For example, will cruise ships allow a large number of non vaccinated people on a cruise, with the risk of an outbreak in such a confined space?

And if not, surely they will look for proof. Same with several other industries.

Westernworld.

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Its going to be fascinating to see how society opens up once covid vaccines become common place.

For example, will cruise ships allow a large number of non vaccinated people on a cruise, with the risk of an outbreak in such a confined space?

And if not, surely they will look for proof. Same with several other industries.

Restrictions for anyone refusing the vaccine

Fukk them at this stsge

Duke of Url

I dont see any clarification on the following.

If you receive the vaccine and you come into close contact with someone who has tested positive, Are you expected to still get tested?

hmmm

tobefrank321 wrote: »

For example, will cruise ships allow a large number of non vaccinated people on a cruise, with the risk of an outbreak in such a confined space?

People will travel once they think it is safe. Cruises, airlines etc. will do whatever they think is right to attract the most people back (and there's a concern for staff safety also). Outbreaks of viruses on board ships or planes would put people off travelling.

I notice that the Quantas CEO today said that proof of vaccination will be a "non-negotiable" condition for international travel on their planes:
https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/health-safety/qantas-ceo-alan-joyce-says-proof-of-covid19-vaccination-will-be-a-condition-of-international-air-travel/news-story/410d37274bcdbd7adf60db6ca4112a8d

mightyreds

Westernworld. wrote: »

Restrictions for anyone refusing the vaccine

Fukk them at this stsge

I see Ticketmaster already looking into no entry without vaccine cert or negative test. I would presume travel will be much stricter and some countries will expect a vaccine cert before boarding the flight.

tobefrank321

hmmm wrote: »

People will travel once they think it is safe. Cruises, airlines etc. will do whatever they think is right to attract the most people back (and there's a concern for staff safety also). Outbreaks of viruses on board ships or planes would put people off travelling.

I notice that the Quantas CEO today said that proof of vaccination will be a "non-negotiable" condition for international travel on their planes:
https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/health-safety/qantas-ceo-alan-joyce-says-proof-of-covid19-vaccination-will-be-a-condition-of-international-air-travel/news-story/410d37274bcdbd7adf60db6ca4112a8d

Absolutely. Some of these cruises will be half full of elderly overweight Americans who won't take any vaccine but who will demand access to hospital or ICU if things go south.

Everyone will have to be responsible when it comes to vaccination, including cruise ship companies.

stephenjmcd

mightyreds wrote: »

I see Ticketmaster already looking into no entry without vaccine cert or negative test. I would presume travel will be much stricter and some countries will expect a vaccine cert before boarding the flight.

Ticketmaster already said that idea is nothing to do with them.

It would be up to a promoter what the policy is.

Roger_007

mightyreds wrote: »

I see Ticketmaster already looking into no entry without vaccine cert or negative test. I would presume travel will be much stricter and some countries will expect a vaccine cert before boarding the flight.

I can foresee a thriving industry in bogus vaccine certs.

ixoy

Duke of Url wrote: »

If you receive the vaccine and you come into close contact with someone who has tested positive, Are you expected to still get tested?

And will you be expected to isolate? After all, certainly in the initial roll out, you'll still potentially be transmitting since reductions in transmission aren't yet known and it'll be a while before everyone is vaccinated.

hmmm

AstraZeneca - 200 million doses by end of 2020, 700 million by end of Q1 2021.

hmmm

hmmm wrote: »

AstraZeneca - 200 million doses by end of 2020, 700 million by end of Q1 2021.

That's terrific

Airlines like Qantas have already come out and said that long-haul flights will require proof of vaccination.

Westernworld.

hmmm wrote: »

AstraZeneca - 200 million doses by end of 2020, 700 million by end of Q1 2021.

Chinese must be manufacturing it, ouch

eigrod

Taoiseach talking down at Dublin Port right now. Vaccine distribution strategy expected by Dec 11.

https://twitter.com/smurphytv/status/1330847577642766336?s=21

opinionated3

Looking at ourselves here in Ireland what do we think now? Population of just under 5 m..... Surely it's not unreasonable to think that we could all be vaccinated by summer time? Or am I way off??

JDD

ixoy wrote: »

And will you be expected to isolate? After all, certainly in the initial roll out, you'll still potentially be transmitting since reductions in transmission aren't yet known and it'll be a while before everyone is vaccinated.

That's an interesting one. I'd imagine that Stages 1 and 2 of the roll out will be over 80's and health care workers. If they are a close contact of a positive case then yes, it is likely that they will still have to isolate and be tested, in circumstances where 90% of the population are as of yet unvaccinated, and the assumption being that you could still be contagious even if the vaccine prevents you from becoming ill.

Once we get through Stages 3 to whatever, I think it's unlikely you will need to be tested if you have had the vaccine. Say you are a close contact of someone on an airplane. The HSE will probably contact you and say to restrict your movements for two weeks and get tested if you develop symptoms. It's unlikely - even if your vaccine hasn't worked and you develop covid, that you will spread the disease far because most around you will also be vaccinated. It should be easy enough for the HSE to contain any ensuing infections, and perhaps they won't even need to because there isn't as much of a risk of a widespread outbreak.

JDD

Westernworld. wrote: »

Chinese must be manufacturing it, ouch

Isn't it that Indian billionaire that has been producing the vaccine in his factories for about three months now?

stephenjmcd

eigrod wrote: »

Taoiseach talking down at Dublin Port right now. Vaccine distribution strategy expected by Dec 11.

https://twitter.com/smurphytv/status/1330847577642766336?s=21

Ties in with when FDA approval is expected. Would assume EMA at similar date so.