COVID-19: Vaccine and testing procedures Megathread Part 3 - Read OP

timsey tiger

Looks like the 7 incidence rate in UK is going to drop below the German one in a few days. Great news for the vaccination effort and less to worry about from the common travel area.

timsey tiger

is_that_so wrote: »

But also quite annoying that we've had weeks of panic before somebody said "actually it may not be such a problem".

Not sure how you are drawing this conclusion. This is actually an admission that it is a problem (though managable) and the abuse meeted out to SA for dropping AZ vaccine was the correct decision.

The sudden interest in travel restrictions in the UK also confirm the issue for the UK and AZ vaccine. Like why now when you are almost immune?

speckle

Hmmzis wrote: »

Plus, most likely, against anything else that has the 484K mutation in it. In addition, mixing the WT and 484K shots could induce a much broader response that's not specific to any single variant. Just giving a single dose to convalescents seems to do that already quite well.

Would this also be the case for people who have covid and mounted a good antibody etc response as they were exposed to all the virus not just the spike protein... further more can some of the coding in the virus whem taken as a whole actually be beneficial or harmless to humans while some parts have a negative impact as we have seen?

afatbollix

political analyst wrote: »

Why didn't the Oxford scientists and AstraZeneca ask more elderly people to volunteer as test subjects for the vaccine when the original trials were taking place?

They mostly used Health care workers for the trials.

Unfortunately, they retire at 65 and that's why not many were used.

Stark

Merck are going to produce J&J vaccine https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/03/02/merck-johnson-and-johnson-covid-vaccine-partnership/

is_that_so

timsey tiger wrote: »

Not sure how you are drawing this conclusion. This is actually an admission that it is a problem (though managable) and the abuse meeted out to SA for dropping AZ vaccine was the correct decision.

The sudden interest in travel restrictions in the UK also confirm the issue for the UK and AZ vaccine. Like why now when you are almost immune?

That would be the media, as commented above and the many people in authority completely unqualified to make such comments on it. Who exactly abused SA?

Hmmzis

speckle wrote: »

Would this also be the case for people who have covid and mounted a good antibody etc response as they were exposed to all the virus not just the spike protein... further more can some of the coding in the virus whem taken as a whole actually be beneficial or harmless to humans while some parts have a negative impact as we have seen?

Convalescents have already been shown to respond exceptionally well to even a single vaccine dose with improved cross-neutralization ability (2x drop to SA variant instead of 3-6x drop).

If we are talking about neutralizing antibody functions then only the S protein has been found induce such antibodies.

If we are including T cells, then the protein choice to include becomes more varied, there are internal non-structural proteins that have lots of T cell epitopes, among them nsp3, nsp6, ORF3. The two other structural proteins N and E contain T cell epitopes as well, but E seems to be poorly conserved among coronaviruses, with N we don't know yet how much mimicry it does with our own proteins.

The trouble with including non-structural proteins and other proteins that have no nAB epitopes is that the body will still produce antibodies against them, so the overall AB amount to nAB amount is going to be greater and for a virus where we don't have all that much functional data for, it could be risky: from blunted nAB responses, to autoimmune reactions and even disease enhancement. If there is a choice then removing anything non-essential for a nAB response from the vaccine is the safest way to go.

ACitizenErased

EU is considering switching from conditional marketing approvals to emergency approvals to speed up process

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-eu-vaccines-idUSKBN2AU1PC?taid=603e5a0a13851800019e4ff5&utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter

trellheim

OK I've spent an hour or two on the net trying to see any reliable sources. There is NO measure of how deliveries to Ireland are on or off planned numbers ;


the steps after that seem to be very well done indeed i.e. getting the shots into people but the actual information itself can't be found.

josip

Hardyn wrote: »

https://apnews.com/article/merck-help-make-johnson-johnson-vaccine-9ca6f1f4c502b095531926a53abe7262

Merck have agreed to help Johnson & Johnson with vaccine production.

Unfortunately it's unlikely to correct any shortfall in supply during Q1/Q2.
Also I understood from the article that it only covers the US, or at least until it's fully vaccinated.

...It was not immediately clear when the effect of Merck’s assistance would be reflected in supply. Previously, federal officials have cautioned that setting up the highly specialized manufacturing lines to produce vaccines would take months...

How many J&J doses were we (Ireland) expecting before end of Q2?

stephenjmcd

josip wrote: »

Unfortunately it's unlikely to correct any shortfall in supply during Q1/Q2.
Also I understood from the article that it only covers the US, or at least until it's fully vaccinated.



How many J&J doses were we (Ireland) expecting before end of Q2?

600k for Q2

is_that_so

ACitizenErased wrote: »

EU is considering switching from conditional marketing approvals to emergency approvals to speed up process

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-eu-vaccines-idUSKBN2AU1PC?taid=603e5a0a13851800019e4ff5&utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter

Is that a wise move I wonder. It seems more of a knee-jerk response to all the criticism they've received and it strikes me as a conversation that should be done over an extended, calmer period.

KrustyUCC

Stephens right above

speckle

Hmmzis wrote: »

Convalescents have already been shown to respond exceptionally well to even a single vaccine dose with improved cross-neutralization ability (2x drop to SA variant instead of 3-6x drop).

If we are talking about neutralizing antibody functions then only the S protein has been found induce such antibodies.

If we are including T cells, then the protein choice to include becomes more varied, there are internal non-structural proteins that have lots of T cell epitopes, among them nsp3, nsp6, ORF3. The two other structural proteins N and E contain T cell epitopes as well, but E seems to be poorly conserved among coronaviruses, with N we don't know yet how much mimicry it does with our own proteins.

The trouble with including non-structural proteins and other proteins that have no nAB epitopes is that the body will still produce antibodies against them, so the overall AB amount to nAB amount is going to be greater and for a virus where we don't have all that much functional data for, it could be risky: from blunted nAB responses, to autoimmune reactions and even disease enhancement. If there is a choice then removing anything non-essential for a nAB response from the vaccine is the safest way to go.

Thankyou for that detailed reply.. showing how it works... was finding it interesting on the different approaches manufactures were taking to covid versus other viruses.

One further question to clarify in my mind would the people convalescing who took the booster would they have included those with autoimmune issues or anybody with a previous adverse reation to other vaccines as I saw in another paper link posted here a 140 fold increase in those already infected but that might have been after a second vaccine?

And does any of the above negate the information excluding those with previous adverse reactions to avoid these vaccines as per manufacturers literature and HSE advice or maybe it is way to early.

Apologies for my non scientific terminology but thanks again for your posts here I can understand most but not all of there meanings but it is a great way of educating one self.
edit think this is the article re 140 fold

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/02/26/world/covid-19-coronavirus

Ficheall

JPup wrote: »

Ugh. Why deliberately spread falsehoods like that?

Oxford clearly stated at the time that the early trials would include mostly younger people until it was proven safe as older people are more at risk if there are substantial side effects.

That's pretty much what I said, yes, but in more words.

Stark

josip wrote: »

Unfortunately it's unlikely to correct any shortfall in supply during Q1/Q2.
Also I understood from the article that it only covers the US, or at least until it's fully vaccinated.

Still good news for us imo. Less chance of any EU deliveries being diverted to make up for US shortfalls.

josip

Stark wrote: »

Still good news for us imo. Less chance of any EU deliveries being diverted to make up for US shortfalls.

All the EU produced doses have to be sent back to the US for finishing as per the original contract.
Have J&J ever confirmed that they will be immediately returned to Europe?

Hmmzis

speckle wrote: »

Thankyou for that detailed reply.. showing how it works... was finding it interesting on the different approaches manufactures were taking to covid versus other viruses.

One further question to clarify in my mind would the people convalescing who could take the booster would they have included those with autoimmune issues or anybody with a previous adverse reation to other vaccines as I saw in another paper link posted here a 140 fold increase in those already infected but that might have been after a second vaccine?

And does any of the above negate the information excluding those with previous adverse reactions to avoid these vaccines as per manufacturers literature and HSE advice or maybe it is way to early.

Apologies for my non scientific terminology but thanks again for your posts here I can understand most but not all of there meanings but it is a great way of educating one self.

I'm not sure there has been any subgroup analysis yet in vaccinated convalescents who have autoimmune disorders, at least I haven't seen any. The 140 fold difference in antibody levels was comparing responses after the 1st dose.

Edit: just noticed your edit, that's yet another study being referenced there. There the 140 fold increase is from peak antibody titers after infection compared to after a single dose in those same people (infection + 1 dose is 140x higher titers than infection alone). Similar things have been noted in other studies.

The exclusions are relating to people with history of severe allergic reactions as it was found that those people can have a bad reaction to the lipid shell in the mRNA vaccines.

VonLuck

What is the situation with the single jab? Is the EMA reviewing this at the moment or how does this get decided upon? I see a lot of reports of "single dose shows X% efficacy" but it all seems a bit clear as to how it gets across the line. Are they awaiting more results from testing?

accensi0n

"The figures show that from Monday to Saturday, it had delivered 77,557 doses."

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0302/1200357-vaccines-over-85s/

Frustrating that they release Monday to Saturday figures when the commitment of 100k doses was for the week.

josip

accensi0n wrote: »

"The figures show that from Monday to Saturday, it had delivered 77,557 doses."

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0302/1200357-vaccines-over-85s/

Frustrating that they release Monday to Saturday figures when the commitment of 100k doses was for the week.

There's always been a 2 day lag on the vaccinated numbers.

is_that_so

VonLuck wrote: »

What is the situation with the single jab? Is the EMA reviewing this at the moment or how does this get decided upon? I see a lot of reports of "single dose shows X% efficacy" but it all seems a bit clear as to how it gets across the line. Are they awaiting more results from testing?

A decision on J&J is expected on 11 March and as the FDA have already approved it, it should happen. Supplies from April.

adam240610

More optimistic now than since this whole thing started. Vaccinations promising to really start ramping up in four weeks or so, cases dropped and hospitalisations falling.

Rté needs to share some more positivity around all the good solid progress lately

SheepsClothing

accensi0n wrote: »

"The figures show that from Monday to Saturday, it had delivered 77,557 doses."

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0302/1200357-vaccines-over-85s/

Frustrating that they release Monday to Saturday figures when the commitment of 100k doses was for the week.

They said they wouldn't reach the 100k due to the delay of two Astra Zenica deliveries over this week and last.

Mark1916

https://twitter.com/ema_news/status/1366789538522296327?s=21

seamus

adam240610 wrote: »

More optimistic now than since this whole thing started. Vaccinations promising to really start ramping up in four weeks or so, cases dropped and hospitalisations falling.

Rté needs to share some more positivity around all the good solid progress lately

Even after we've all opened up, RTE will still be banging on about new variants being discovered in the vain hope that they can rekindle some of that fear in people.

is_that_so

OK, there is this Daily Mail claim about vaccination. A collection of anecdotes and quite mad really!

It seems ludicrous – a vaccine designed to protect against one virus can, somehow, improve other totally unrelated elements of health.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9307203/Coronavirus-jab-help-fight-cancer-chronic-pain-Alzheimers.html

VonLuck

is_that_so wrote: »

A decision on J&J is expected on 11 March and as the FDA have already approved it, it should happen. Supplies from April.

Any word on reducing the existing vaccines to one dose though?

JacksonHeightsOwn

Mark1916 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/ema_news/status/1366789538522296327?s=21

I know this is positive news, but out of curiosity, if they're going to approve it on the 11th, what's stopping them from approving it now?

What exactly will they find out within the next 9 days that they don't already know anyway?

is_that_so

VonLuck wrote: »

Any word on reducing the existing vaccines to one dose though?

Probably not enough data on that yet and we have a plan largely built around two shots.