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

hmmm

Looks like good news about the new "UK" strain.

https://twitter.com/florian_krammer/status/1341493434935365632

Water John

dominatinMC wrote: »

And round and round we go. This issue has been discussed many times and it is generally acknowledged that once the majority of vulnerable are protected, restrictions will be gradually lifted and we will be moving on from this. Yes, some proportion of the vulnerable groups will not be able to take the vaccine but that is not an acceptable justification for prolonged restrictions and social distancing. The goodwill of the general population is already on the decline, and the government will not have sufficient cause for restrictions once we reach a "critical mass" as Leo himself put it. That is unfortunate for the vulnerable but life will move on.
The remit of NPHET is to protect lives and that is it. At some stage economics, the well being and mental health of the general population will supersede the need to protect a very very small minority.

I don't disagree with you. what I'm saying is, until all the major at risk groups have been vaccinated, that we will have to maintain precautions. I would see that as being possibly early summer and optimistically might be a bit earlier than that.

plodder

antiskeptic wrote: »

I don't see how the graph addresses the question. Narrow it down to just the placebo group for simplicities sake. The graph shows a steady cumulative increase of Covid cases in the unvaccinated group, as you would expect. You end up after a period of time with a total. 132 or whatever

My question is: what would the range of numbers be if you observed 100 groups x 24,000.

You would naturally see a cumulative increase in all groups over time. The cumulative total wouldn't be 132 each time. That much is certain. So what would it be?

What if it was 9? Wouldn't the graph look just like the vaccinated group graph?

The low numbers do count. If makes the possible range of totals obtainable in like groups (say 100 groups of 24,000 unvaccinated) a more relevant issue.

What matters is the gap between the two curves. Since the subjects are randomly assigned to either the placebo or the vaccinated groups, whatever other variables that might affect the infection rate, should be the same for both groups.

If you are asking what would happen if the whole experiment was repeated 100 times, the numbers might be different, but the curves would be the same relative to each other, because the vaccine has a real effect. And we don't need to repeat the experiment 100 times to know this. The single trial was big enough to know the effect is real.

dominatinMC

Water John wrote: »

I don't disagree with you. what I'm saying is, until all the major at risk groups have been vaccinated, that we will have to maintain precautions. I would see that as being possibly early summer and optimistically might be a bit earlier than that.

Fair enough, apologies for the tone of my reply. There are a few posters who are asking the same questions regarding indefinite restrictions, when the reality is most likely as you point out above.

speckle

hmmm wrote: »

Looks like good news about the new "UK" strain.

https://twitter.com/florian_krammer/status/1341493434935365632

That is very good news. Thanks

plodder

plodder wrote: »

What matters is the gap between the two curves. Since the subjects are randomly assigned to either the placebo or the vaccinated groups, whatever other variables that might affect the infection rate, should be the same for both groups.

If you are asking what would happen if the whole experiment was repeated 100 times, the numbers might be different, but the curves would be the same relative to each other, because the vaccine has a real effect. And we don't need to repeat the experiment 100 times to know this. The single trial was big enough to know the effect is real.

Just to add the 24000 is irrelevant in the efficacy trial. With numbers of 132 cases in placebo and 9 in vaccine group, it is the equivalent of injecting 200 of each group with the vaccine and then at a later date deliberately infecting them with the virus. In that scenario if 132 from the placebo and only 9 from the vaccine group got ill you would definitely say it works. In the real world you can’t do that however as for one you would need to knowingly infect 200 people who had no vaccine. That’s why you give in to as many people as possible and as randomly ( or representative) as possible, and then hope that the number of infections in the communities in which your subjects live is sufficient to ensure enough people are exposed to the virus to adequately test the vaccine. Because of the numbers involved, this doubles up as a massive safety study also.

dominatinMC

dominatinMC wrote: »

Fair enough, apologies for the tone of my reply. There are a few posters who are asking the same questions regarding indefinite restrictions, when the reality is most likely as you point out above.

I know and understand the vaccines will take time. But. If indefinite restrictions are not going to be in play then why the lack of positivity regarding them from NPHET. Surely they are a solution even with the consideration of time.

Sinovac's CoronaVac candidate should be reporting their interim results from a trial in Brazil tomorrow. It's an inactivated virus type, so will be interesting to see how it compares to the mRNA and viral vector types.

JacksonHeightsOwn

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Sinovac's CoronaVac candidate should be reporting their interim results from a trial in Brazil tomorrow. It's an inactivated virus type, so will be interesting to see how it compares to the mRNA and viral vector types.

That's one of the Chinese ones right?

I look forward to seeing how that's faired,

Hmmzis

Deleted User wrote: »

Sinovac's CoronaVac candidate should be reporting their interim results from a trial in Brazil tomorrow. It's an inactivated virus type, so will be interesting to see how it compares to the mRNA and viral vector types.

The Sinopharm read out at 86% efficacy without any moderate or severe cases in the vaccine arm. Hopefully this one is the same or even better. I think Sinovac were using two boosters each a week apart (3 doses in total).

stephenjmcd

Varadkar on prime time saying Moderna expected on 6th (as we know) also referenced AstraZeneca for end of January.

Thats the second time they've mentioned AstraZeneca in January in the last few days, must be hearing something at EU level.

February sounds like it'll be a massive month for vaccines arriving in good volume, as if January wasn't big enough already

Van.Bosch

If we are receiving it in 26th - what needs to happen that it takes until 30th to start vaccinating people?

ACitizenErased

Van.Bosch wrote: »

If we are receiving it in 26th - what needs to happen that it takes until 30th to start vaccinating people?

I asked the same question to myself today. My father works for the HSE and says they're ready to go on the ground so not sure what the hold up is.

Van.Bosch

ACitizenErased wrote: »

I asked the same question to myself today. My father works for the HSE and says they're ready to go on the ground so not sure what the hold up is.

Germany was aiming for 27th so curious, although they may get it a day earlier than us due to proximity.

hmmm

Van.Bosch wrote: »

If we are receiving it in 26th - what needs to happen that it takes until 30th to start vaccinating people?

A couple of European countries seem to be saying they are starting on the 27th.

Not a good look to be starting on the 30th. I know it's only 3 days, but the pressure should be kept on the government to roll out vaccines as fast as they can.

hmmm

It's all about manufacturing vaccines as quickly as possible now. Germany is also talking to Biontech about accelerating the commissioning of their Marburg plant.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/22/us/politics/pfizer-vaccine-doses.html

"The Trump administration and Pfizer are close to a deal under which the pharmaceutical company would bolster supply of its coronavirus vaccine for the United States by at least tens of millions of doses next year in exchange for a government directive giving it better access to manufacturing supplies, people familiar with the discussions said."

stephenjmcd

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Varadkar on prime time saying Moderna expected on 6th (as we know) also referenced AstraZeneca for end of January.

Thats the second time they've mentioned AstraZeneca in January in the last few days, must be hearing something at EU level.

February sounds like it'll be a massive month for vaccines arriving in good volume, as if January wasn't big enough already

To follow up on this, he also said

"Moving into February and March, [we expect] having the vaccine being given out in GPs, pharmacies, also mass vaccination centres, 15 of them around the country.”

lbj666

ACitizenErased wrote: »

I asked the same question to myself today. My father works for the HSE and says they're ready to go on the ground so not sure what the hold up is.

They ll easily make up those days given that first delivery is only 10,000 and then 40,000 per week until more vacines comes on board.

Van.Bosch

lbj666 wrote: »

They ll easily make up those days given that first delivery is only 10,000 and then 40,000 per week until more vacines comes on board.

Yeah but is that good enough? Get the 10,000 first doses started 3 days earlier, it means they get the second dose 3 days earlier and then will be protected 3 days earlier which could save their life.

trellheim

Has anybody published a schedule of when serious quantities of vaccine begin arriving in Ireland ? 40,000 a day is good for the most at risk but you need very large quantities for the whole country

Miike

lbj666 wrote: »

They ll easily make up those days given that first delivery is only 10,000 and then 40,000 per week until more vacines comes on board.

Do you have a source on the 40,000 a week figure? I keep saying varying numbers on this one it's really winding me up (not your fault, just piss poor communication from the top).

namloc1980

Miike wrote: »

Do you have a source on the 40,000 a week figure? I keep saying varying numbers on this one it's really winding me up (not your fault, just piss poor communication from the top).

https://amp.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/covid-restrictions-cabinet-agree-to-shut-restaurants-and-hair-salons-on-christmas-eve-39891245.html?__twitter_impression=true

It was also mentioned a few times on the news yesterday by various people. It's going to take years to vaccinate everyone at 40,000 doses a week. You'd hope they have a plan to seriously ramp this up quickly.

namloc1980

trellheim wrote: »

Has anybody published a schedule of when serious quantities of vaccine begin arriving in Ireland ? 40,000 a day is good for the most at risk but you need very large quantities for the whole country

It's 40,000 a week, not a day.

El Weirdo

namloc1980 wrote: »

It's 40,000 a week, not a day.

That's just the Pfizer vaccine.

When the Moderna and AstraZenica vaccines are approved, those weekly numbers should increase significantly.

Stark

The EU deal only covered a small number of Moderna vaccines afaik so really waiting on Astrazenaca to scale up properly.

Danzy

namloc1980 wrote: »

https://amp.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/covid-restrictions-cabinet-agree-to-shut-restaurants-and-hair-salons-on-christmas-eve-39891245.html?__twitter_impression=true

It was also mentioned a few times on the news yesterday by various people. It's going to take years to vaccinate everyone at 40,000 doses a week. You'd hope they have a plan to seriously ramp this up quickly.

That's just off the Pfizer vaccine.

Enough will be vaccinated by St Patrick's day of the most vulnerable to reduce the death rate significantly.

Gile_na_gile

Over in UK, Blair suggesting using one jab only per person of Pfizer vaccine, and to move faster on Oxford AZ one. More urgency required.

https://www.ft.com/content/dd86f99e-bfe0-3037-af8b-9ad236e7da66

namloc1980

El Weirdo wrote: »

That's just the Pfizer vaccine.

When the Moderna and AstraZenica vaccines are approved, those weekly numbers should increase significantly.

EU has a relatively small number of the Moderna vaccine ordered. The EMA won't meet until the 6th January to review approving it, meanwhile the FDA in the US has already approved it and it's being rolled out en masse. The EMA hasn't yet confirmed when they expect to review the AstraZenica vaccine. It's all very slow and bureaucratic.

namloc1980

Gile_na_gile wrote: »

Over in UK, Blair suggesting using one jab only per person of Pfizer vaccine, and to move faster on Oxford AZ one. More urgency required.

https://www.ft.com/content/dd86f99e-bfe0-3037-af8b-9ad236e7da66

Too slow. Why we're waiting until the 30th to start vaccinating here is beyond me when the first doses are expected in the country on the 27th. No sense of urgency.

antiskeptic

Edit:

Told by mod to cease and desist with my line of questioning