nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

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

Masala

Today being Paddy Day 2020... when do you think we will have a ‘flu jab’ / pill / syrup that we can take to make us immune/ les likely to catch this 19 virus?.

Mod: The purpose of this thread is baked into the title - COVID-19: Vaccine/antidote and testing procedures - it's not a platform to push an anti vaccination agenda. If posters wish to discuss the perceived cons of vaccinations, or push various theories regarding 'the agenda' (whatever that is supposed to mean), open a thread elsewhere on it.

Threadbanned Users:
3xh
Dr.Frost
kingbhome
nannerbenahs
skooterblue2
Fodla
Caraibh
drunkmonkey
lawrencesummers
Howard Beale

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

holdyerhorses

hmmm wrote: »

We'll probably be getting a Covid vaccine every few years, waning levels of immunity will be topped up.

Assume you mean those determined to be vulnerable by "we", because itd be pointless, cost inefficient and without benefit otherwise.

polesheep

Thierry12 wrote: »

I'd back a fit 55 year old 6ft man of 12 stone who runs everyday over a 30 year old 6ft man of 20 stone who struggles for breath up the stairs to do better with Covid?

Would you?

Absolutely. It's just that 'fat' isn't a definition, whereas 'obese' is. Also, I don't get the reference to thirty years of age and up. The facts show that the significant change in age factor occurs after seventy.

polesheep

timsey tiger wrote: »

I'm not a morbid sick fúck who would bet on another person dying or not.:mad:

That's not how it was meant, but I think you know that.

hmmm

holdyerhorses wrote: »

Assume you mean those determined to be vulnerable by "we", because itd be pointless, cost inefficient and without benefit otherwise.

Going to have to again agree to disagree with your usual opinion presented as fact.

Until we know more about the effectiveness of the vaccines at both reducing transmission and preventing serious illness, we won't know how best to deploy them. And many/most of us in in the "non-vulnerable" group aren't likely to want to take our risks with catching a novel virus when we could take a safe and tested vaccine instead. Long-covid looks life-changing for many who "survive", and we don't know the long-term impacts of even milder infections.

There's also the herd immunity issue where many of the vulnerable may not be able to take the vaccine, or if it is ineffective for them, in which case they will be relying on the rest of us suppressing the transmission of disease.

polesheep

hmmm wrote: »

Going to have to again agree to disagree with your usual opinion presented as fact.

Until we know more about the effectiveness of the vaccines at both reducing transmission and preventing serious illness, we won't know how best to deploy them. And many/most of us in in the "non-vulnerable" group aren't likely to want to take our risks with catching a novel virus when we could take a safe and tested vaccine instead. Long-covid looks life-changing for many who "survive", and we don't know the long-term impacts of even milder infections.

There's also the herd immunity issue where many of the vulnerable may not be able to take the vaccine, or if it is ineffective for them, in which case they will be relying on the rest of us suppressing the transmission of disease.

Indeed, as you proved yourself.

timsey tiger

tobefrank321 wrote: »

You know what he meant, no need to be overly dramatic.

His point was that a healthy middle aged person has a better chance than a severely obese and unhealthy young person. Its not rocket science.

Well good for you deciphering what he ment. I will stick to answering what he said.

As for it not being rocket science, it is obviously not science of any kind, it's just introjectioned prejudice.

polesheep

timsey tiger wrote: »

Well good for you deciphering what he ment. I will stick to answering what he said.

As for it not being rocket science, it is obviously not science of any kind, it's just introjectioned prejudice.

Sadly, this is now the way the world seems to work. A person could be killing themselves through being overweight, but no one is allowed to advise them that they are obese for fear of being prejudiced.

timsey tiger

polesheep wrote: »

Sadly, this is now the way the world seems to work. A person could be killing themselves through being overweight, but no one is allowed to advise them that they are obese for fear of being prejudiced.

That is a non sequitur, but I guess you know this.

Irish Stones

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Agreed. You would think healthcare staff in particular would be continually at risk after initial infection. They are among the most exposed, tested and analyzed. I'm not sure there's been any reinfections anywhere among healthcare staff unless someone can link to it?

My wife works as a healthcare staff at the local hospital.
She got the virus at the beginning of the pandemic, so did I. She's being tested regularly and so she's still negative.
I believe that a reinfection is something that might happen, not that happens often.
I believe that I'm immune now, as are all the millions of people who got the virus and have recovered.

Irish Stones

Thierry12 wrote: »

Some guy posting here working as a hospital pharmacist in HSE says it happens more than you think in Ireland, just not reported

That's fine, but we also know that 40+ millions cases isn't the right number of cases, it's just the official number of cases.
So official and unofficial figures are valid in both fields, both cases and reinfection, and I think the rate between them is still the same as we know now.

polesheep

timsey tiger wrote: »

That is a non sequitur, but I guess you know this.

Nope.

D.Q

Irish Stones wrote: »

My wife works as a healthcare staff at the local hospital.
She got the virus at the beginning of the pandemic, so did I. She's being tested regularly and so she's still negative.
I believe that a reinfection is something that might happen, not that happens often.
I believe that I'm immune now, as are all the millions of people who got the virus and have recovered.

How are you doing now?

Irish Stones

D.Q wrote: »

How are you doing now?

Thanks for asking.
I think I'm one of those long-covid patients.

I never had heavy or severe symptoms from the beginning. I had some of those non-specific symptoms, like head ache, sore throat and eyes, extreme weakness and tiredness. Also had slight hallucinations for a few weeks.

I never had a short breath, or cough, high temperature, body pains, diarrhea.

My wife was feeling even better than me, and recovered faster.

I got my second negative swab after 37 days.
After my recover I was still feeling tired and weak, on some days I was so weak that getting up from bed was an unbearable effort. But thanks God this has vanished about three or four months later.
What I still have is some stuffy nose, especially after a meal or when I lie down on the bed. For the latter I still have to spray some Vicks into my nose every night.
The worst thing, I think, is what they call the brain fog. Sometimes it seems I can't remember what I'm doing or where I'm going.

One morning I woke up and was shocked to see a cat in my home. She was our cat, I just didn't remember we had one. I tend to forget minor things, and can't focus on long speeches or readings.
I know many other people are in this same condition, and a few days ago the Irish Times had an article on this

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/health-family/covid-survivors-say-brain-fog-has-impaired-their-ability-to-function-normally-1.4378794

Hopefully this thing too will pass.

holdyerhorses

hmmm wrote: »

Going to have to again agree to disagree with your usual opinion presented as fact.

Until we know more about the effectiveness of the vaccines at both reducing transmission and preventing serious illness, we won't know how best to deploy them. And many/most of us in in the "non-vulnerable" group aren't likely to want to take our risks with catching a novel virus when we could take a safe and tested vaccine instead. Long-covid looks life-changing for many who "survive", and we don't know the long-term impacts of even milder infections.

There's also the herd immunity issue where many of the vulnerable may not be able to take the vaccine, or if it is ineffective for them, in which case they will be relying on the rest of us suppressing the transmission of disease.

Suppress the disease? Speculation.

Mark1916

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/29/coronavirus-moderna-says-it-is-actively-preparing-for-launch-of-vaccine.html

On a call with investors Thursday, Bancel said the company expects the data and safety monitoring board, which will assess whether the trial is successful, will conduct its first interim analysis in November. The board will not conduct its analysis until after there are 53 cases of Covid-19 diagnosed in Moderna's phase three trial.

November will be an interesting month.

stephenjmcd

Mark1916 wrote: »

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/29/coronavirus-moderna-says-it-is-actively-preparing-for-launch-of-vaccine.html

On a call with investors Thursday, Bancel said the company expects the data and safety monitoring board, which will assess whether the trial is successful, will conduct its first interim analysis in November. The board will not conduct its analysis until after there are 53 cases of Covid-19 diagnosed in Moderna's phase three trial.

November will be an interesting month.

Indeed November shaping up to be an interesting month for multiple vaccines

tobefrank321

There was talk of the Sinopham vaccine being rolled out in UAE for emergency use among healthcare workers back in September.

They are still seeing a steady rise in cases though like everywhere else but doing reasonably well on deaths.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/united-arab-emirates/

Hard to tell what impact the vaccine is having on healthcare workers. If effective at the very least their health system should be protected from significant absenteeism due to covid infections.

hmmm

Mark1916 wrote: »

On a call with investors Thursday, Bancel said the company expects the data and safety monitoring board, which will assess whether the trial is successful, will conduct its first interim analysis in November. The board will not conduct its analysis until after there are 53 cases of Covid-19 diagnosed in Moderna's phase three trial.

I've heard an interesting argument, and someone more qualified than me can correct it, that because neither Pfizer, Astra or Moderna seem to have reached their required number of cases yet it suggests that the vaccine side of the trial may be going well. If the vaccine was proving ineffective, they'd reach their "goal" of Covid cases earlier as more people in the vaccinated group would be becoming infected.

There was speculation in the financial media that Pfizer already had an interim analysis of their vaccine in early October (i.e. a certain number of cases had been reached). This is now apparently not true. If it had been the case, it would have suggested the vaccine was not particularly effective.

From August:
https://www.statnews.com/2020/08/24/pfizer-edge-in-the-race-for-a-covid-19-vaccine-could-be-a-scientist-with-two-best-sellers-to-her-credit/
"For Pfizer, the first look could occur as early as September, when there are 32 cases of the disease in the study."

2 days ago
"On a call with investors Tuesday, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said that the company doesn’t anticipate making any announcement on its trial until about a week after the data and safety monitoring board conducts its review of the company’s phase three vaccine trial. The board, which will assess whether its trial with German drugmaker BioNTech has been successful, has not conducted an interim efficacy analysis yet, Pfizer said."

#optimismthursday

stephenjmcd

hmmm wrote: »

I've heard an interesting argument, and someone more qualified than me can correct it, that because neither Pfizer, Astra or Moderna seem to have reached their required number of cases yet it suggests that the vaccine side of the trial may be going well. If the vaccine was proving ineffective, they'd reach their "goal" of Covid cases earlier as more people in the vaccinated group would be becoming infected.

There was speculation in the financial media that Pfizer already had an interim analysis of their vaccine in early October (i.e. a certain number of cases had been reached). This is now apparently not true. If it had been the case, it would have suggested the vaccine was not particularly effective.

From August:
https://www.statnews.com/2020/08/24/pfizer-edge-in-the-race-for-a-covid-19-vaccine-could-be-a-scientist-with-two-best-sellers-to-her-credit/
"For Pfizer, the first look could occur as early as September, when there are 32 cases of the disease in the study."

2 days ago
"On a call with investors Tuesday, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said that the company doesn’t anticipate making any announcement on its trial until about a week after the data and safety monitoring board conducts its review of the company’s phase three vaccine trial. The board, which will assess whether its trial with German drugmaker BioNTech has been successful, has not conducted an interim efficacy analysis yet, Pfizer said."

#optimismthursday

Its an argument that can be made, I suggested it here yesterday and essentially someone else came in talking nonsense in reply to it so it may have got lost somewhere.

Anyway yes I said yesterday if the number of cases haven't been reached theres potentially a few reasons, just two off the top of my head.

1) As you say the argument could be made that the vaccine trials are going quite well and offer quite a good level of protection to the participants, we've not seen any data to discount this so its possible.

2) Less virus in circulation, means its bad for trials to get efficiency readouts, however given the levels of transmission even in Europe and other parts of the world I find it difficult to think this would be the case. It was flagged by Oxford back in June/July that less virus in circulation would slow them down but the amount in circulation isn't at low levels at the moment.

Given the size of the test groups in play here you'd expect a decent number of cases to show up in the trial but if they aren't reaching even a small number of cases such as 32 then personally I'd have high hopes over the efficiency of the vaccine & that its doing its job, if the vaccine was essentially worthless and not doing anything you should reach the case numbers relatively quickly.

Its something to keep an eye on I think and will make the readouts even more intersting when they eventually get published

tobefrank321

I'm going to take a stab at possible numbers infected/not infected in the Brazil trials.

30,000 enrolled, 15k in vaccine and 15k in control group.

Assuming an infection rate of 1000 per 100k every two weeks (many if not most of the volunteers are frontline medical workers so would expect a higher rate of infection). 1000 per 100k, equals 300 per 30k, or 150 per 15k for two weeks.

The trial runs in full for 3 months or 12 weeks.

Multiply 150 x 6 = 900.

So potentially 900 infected over 3 months in both groups.

Assuming an infection rate of 1000 and a trial running for 3 months of full enrollment, you'd expect close to 1000 infected in each group.

Back of the envelope numbers though.

hmmm

I think it's only 2,000 people in Oxford's trial in Brazil. I'm not sure whether it's 50:50 vaccine & placebo, or 66:33. I'm also not sure when they start counting (i.e. after first/second dose)

"On 2 June, the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (ANVISA) approved the inclusion of Brazil in the clinical trials conducted by Oxford University and supported by AstraZeneca, considering 2,000 volunteers to be tested in the country. "

Xenoman11

polesheep wrote: »

That's not how it was meant, but I think you know that.

why let an opportunity for a good outrage go to waste

[Deleted User]

hmmm wrote: »

I think it's only 2,000 people in Oxford's trial in Brazil. I'm not sure whether it's 50:50 vaccine & placebo, or 66:33. I'm also not sure when they start counting (i.e. after first/second dose)

"On 2 June, the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (ANVISA) approved the inclusion of Brazil in the clinical trials conducted by Oxford University and supported by AstraZeneca, considering 2,000 volunteers to be tested in the country. "

I'm relatively sure they are split 66:33 Vaccine/Placebo and I think the count starts 2 weeks after second dose. I'll try and find where I read that, possible I'm mixing it up with one of the others.

Also think their interim point is 75 incidents, bit higher than the others.

Thierry12

hmmm wrote: »

I've heard an interesting argument, and someone more qualified than me can correct it, that because neither Pfizer, Astra or Moderna seem to have reached their required number of cases yet it suggests that the vaccine side of the trial may be going well. If the vaccine was proving ineffective, they'd reach their "goal" of Covid cases earlier as more people in the vaccinated group would be becoming infected.

There was speculation in the financial media that Pfizer already had an interim analysis of their vaccine in early October (i.e. a certain number of cases had been reached). This is now apparently not true. If it had been the case, it would have suggested the vaccine was not particularly effective.

From August:
https://www.statnews.com/2020/08/24/pfizer-edge-in-the-race-for-a-covid-19-vaccine-could-be-a-scientist-with-two-best-sellers-to-her-credit/
"For Pfizer, the first look could occur as early as September, when there are 32 cases of the disease in the study."

2 days ago
"On a call with investors Tuesday, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said that the company doesn’t anticipate making any announcement on its trial until about a week after the data and safety monitoring board conducts its review of the company’s phase three vaccine trial. The board, which will assess whether its trial with German drugmaker BioNTech has been successful, has not conducted an interim efficacy analysis yet, Pfizer said."

#optimismthursday

Does that mean the vaccine is sterilising?

If vaccine group are not being infected

tobefrank321

hmmm wrote: »

I think it's only 2,000 people in Oxford's trial in Brazil. I'm not sure whether it's 50:50 vaccine & placebo, or 66:33. I'm also not sure when they start counting (i.e. after first/second dose)

"On 2 June, the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (ANVISA) approved the inclusion of Brazil in the clinical trials conducted by Oxford University and supported by AstraZeneca, considering 2,000 volunteers to be tested in the country. "

Fair enough, I thought I read somewhere it was 30,000 in Brazil.

Looking at the AstraZenica site, they planned to recruit 30,000 in the US.

https://www.astrazeneca.com/media-centre/articles/2020/university-of-oxford-potential-covid-19-vaccine-phase-iii-clinical-trial-initiated-in-the-us.html

With twice as many in vaccine group as control group.

Depending on infection rate, but if its high, eg 1000 every two weeks, then they are likely to have something like 1500 in the vaccine group exposed to the virus and half that in the control group.

There should be more than enough numbers exposed.

Russman

Is the required number of infections to be reached a number of infections in the vaccinated group or a number in both the placebo and vaccinated groups combined ?

Hmmzis

Russman wrote: »

Is the required number of infections to be reached a number of infections in the vaccinated group or a number in both the placebo and vaccinated groups combined ?

Combined. They're looking for infection events regardless of the group the event happened in. Not even sure if anyone outside the safety board would be privy to the current count.

JTMan

WSJ reports on Germany's plans to start vaccinations this year here. (paywall)

- Vaccine will be shipped to more than 60 regional vaccination centers within hours of the substance being approved.
- Initial recipients would include health-care workers, the elderly, clinically vulnerable people, law-enforcement officials and people living in crowded conditions.
- BioNTech has begun storing doses of the vaccine at a secret transport hub.
- Nearly 2,000 Bavarian doctors have already signed up to help.
- A nationwide information campaign will explain the procedure and the rationale behind the prioritization of certain groups.

funnydoggy

JTMan wrote: »

WSJ reports on Germany's plans to start vaccinations this year here. (paywall)

- Vaccine will be shipped to more than 60 regional vaccination centers within hours of the substance being approved.
- Initial recipients would include health-care workers, the elderly, clinically vulnerable people, law-enforcement officials and people living in crowded conditions.
- BioNTech has begun storing doses of the vaccine at a secret transport hub.
- Nearly 2,000 Bavarian doctors have already signed up to help.
- A nationwide information campaign will explain the procedure and the rationale behind the prioritization of certain groups.

Exciting stuff. My partner and their parents would be in the vulnerable category. Looking forward to them having more confidence when heading out.

jackboy

JTMan wrote: »

WSJ reports on Germany's plans to start vaccinations this year here. (paywall)

- Vaccine will be shipped to more than 60 regional vaccination centers within hours of the substance being approved.
- Initial recipients would include health-care workers, the elderly, clinically vulnerable people, law-enforcement officials and people living in crowded conditions.
- BioNTech has begun storing doses of the vaccine at a secret transport hub.
- Nearly 2,000 Bavarian doctors have already signed up to help.
- A nationwide information campaign will explain the procedure and the rationale behind the prioritization of certain groups.

I thought the EU were going to share out the vaccine. How are the Germans getting this first?