New vaccine

[cruisenewbie1976]

49 minutes ago, davecttr said:

530,000 Oxford jabs available from Monday and further batches from February, frankly depressing as there are over 12 million in my age group and over plus special cases. I see the beeb was just as confused as everyone else. As far as I understand the Pfizer vaccine remains at 2 doses at 3 weeks interval and the Oxford one will be 2 doses at 12 week intervals, with up to 80% efficiency after the second dose. By 80% I think they mean if they vaccinate 1 million people 200,000 could still catch COVID, hopefully with a less dangerous infection 😵

 

So do I expect my first dose sometime in April as January no longer counts, then the final dose in July, that is 7 months away 😟

Pfizer is moving to a bigger gap in between doses too. 

[AnnieC]

53 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

I watch every briefing and press conference and it does my blood pressure and mental health no good at all, as I find myself shouting at the press for asking such inane questions whilst not asking the important ones that we all want to know. I would be pressing for a target date by when they hope to have all 9 groups (all over 50’s) vaccinated by. The politicians, medics and scientists alike are all too vague and leaving things open to interpretation. They keep talking about having the ‘most vulnerable’ vaccinated by ‘late Spring’ but what does ‘most vulnerable’ mean? Is that over 70’s and those with underlying health issues, or everyone over 50? Nobody has been crystal clear - we are all making assumptions based on what we think we hear (or, dare I say it, want to hear). Also, when is ‘late Spring’? In my book that could be June which is still 6 months away. I doubt we will be any clearer at 5pm. Boris never answers the question asked and the scientists / medics skirt around it for fear of dropping the politicians in it! 

We may get some answers tonight, if they ask the right questions - Jonathan Van-Tam is on.

[Selbourne]

1 hour ago, AnnieC said:

We may get some answers tonight, if they ask the right questions - Jonathan Van-Tam is on.

Sadly no! Fergus Walsh almost got there, but it was more a statement about the speed needed, rather than a question, so no clear answers given. However, he has just stated on the BBC 6 O’clock news that there are 25 million people aged over 65 or health workers and just for that group to have the vaccine by Easter needs 2 million people to be vaccinated every week from now until then. That is around ten times the current vaccination rate. Obviously the Oxford vaccine is much easier to distribute, but with only 530k doses due next week and a couple of million more in early Feb, you don’t need to be a mathematician to work out that the stats don’t support the rhetoric. This is going to be a very very long process. 

[cruisenewbie1976]

[WECRUISEUK]

1 hour ago, yorkshirephil said:

This is exactly paraphrased from said post, then I have added your latest post for comparison

 

What the 70% means is this,when ten adults are vaccinated they will ALL start to be protected.Nobody is getting a higher level of protection than the next person and the protection will start to work after day 21/22.The protection level is a bit like the flu jab we get every year,but that's about 50/60%,i didn't know that untill earlier this year.

 

As i understand it,there saying that the result of their trials showed that 70% showed no symptoms and the remaining 30% had minor issues,nothing severe.Each person has a different level of protection.That's why it's a success rate of 70%.Ten people in a line,you all have the vaccine,up to 12 weeks later they check and 7 are fine and 3 have some minor coughs or aches,no one dies.70%.

My interpretation of the 70% is clearly at odds with yours and one others understanding of it.Just have to agree to disagree.

[yorkshirephil]

This is a fairly decent report for anyone who is interested.

Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine: Bogus reports, accidental finds - the story of the jab - BBC News

[AnnieC]

58 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

Sadly no! Fergus Walsh almost got there, but it was more a statement about the speed needed, rather than a question, so no clear answers given. However, he has just stated on the BBC 6 O’clock news that there are 25 million people aged over 65 or health workers and just for that group to have the vaccine by Easter needs 2 million people to be vaccinated every week from now until then. That is around ten times the current vaccination rate. Obviously the Oxford vaccine is much easier to distribute, but with only 530k doses due next week and a couple of million more in early Feb, you don’t need to be a mathematician to work out that the stats don’t support the rhetoric. This is going to be a very very long process. 

Agreed. The first couple of questions looked promising, then Sam Coates decided to ask four not particularly good questions and it was all downhill from there, particularly inews.

[tring]

25 minutes ago, yorkshirephil said:

This is a fairly decent report for anyone who is interested.

Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine: Bogus reports, accidental finds - the story of the jab - BBC News

 

Thanks for that link Phil, along with your other reliably informed posts which you have made with the knowledge you have gained during your working life in the pharmaceutical world.

 

Good to have some reliable information amongst the chatter 🙂

 

 

Edited December 30, 2020 by tring

[yorkshirephil]

13 minutes ago, tring said:

 

Thanks for that link Phil, along with your other reliably informed posts which you have made with the knowledge you have gained during your working life in the pharmaceutical world.

 

Good to have some reliable information amongst the chatter 🙂

 

 

Thank you Tring, very kind of you. I am not sure everyone shares your sentiment though😉. I wish the tv companies would make educational programmes where they could explain some of this information without bias, after all it is the most important aspect of so many peoples lives at the moment. I think a lot more people would be happy to have the vaccine if the consequences of not having it were explained.

[pete14]

I agree with that. The only problem is that those who would need to watch it probably wouldn’t and even if they did, they may not believe it or think it applies to them.

[yorkshirephil]

1 minute ago, pete14 said:

I agree with that. The only problem is that those who would need to watch it probably wouldn’t and even if they did, they may not believe it or think it applies to them.

You can lead a horse to water....

[Splice the mainbrace]

Another issue may be that there are 25 million approx over 50s in the UK with a 80% take up it means 20 million for each dose + other vulnerable and health workers. 12 weeks at even 2 million doses a week obviously comes to 24 million doses.

What happens, for example, if we have only got someway through the over 65s by then due to lower dose rates and then the programme of giving the 2nd dose to the those who had the first dose 12 weeks earlier kicks in? Will there be a 12 week gap while the 2nd doses are completed? Otherwise for the overlap period a lot more doses will be required than even 2 million.

[Snow Hill]

59 minutes ago, Splice the mainbrace said:

Another issue may be that there are 25 million approx over 50s in the UK with a 80% take up it means 20 million for each dose + other vulnerable and health workers. 12 weeks at even 2 million doses a week obviously comes to 24 million doses.

What happens, for example, if we have only got someway through the over 65s by then due to lower dose rates and then the programme of giving the 2nd dose to the those who had the first dose 12 weeks earlier kicks in? Will there be a 12 week gap while the 2nd doses are completed? Otherwise for the overlap period a lot more doses will be required than even 2 million.

They need to do some very good planning and have the logistics available to distribute the vaccine, for that I would use the Armed Forces who are used to doing that and have skills to deliver. 

[Adawn47]

1 hour ago, yorkshirephil said:

Thank you Tring, very kind of you. I am not sure everyone shares your sentiment though😉. I wish the tv companies would make educational programmes where they could explain some of this information without bias, after all it is the most important aspect of so many peoples lives at the moment. I think a lot more people would be happy to have the vaccine if the consequences of not having it were explained.

I was interested in JVT's explanation of the vaccine, how it works and the importance of having it during an epidemic. He says it as it is and doesn't sugarcoat anything, well as far as he's to allowed that is. He doesn't blind you with science either, so even I can understand it.

Avril

[davecttr]

JVT also said you can't really compare the %age efficacy of the Oxford and Pfizer vaccines because they used different testing procedures. I remember reading that the Oxford volunteers were tested at regular intervals which I suspect identified asymptomatic infections as well as those displaying symptoms. In contrast the Pfizer subjects were tested if they reported having symptoms which I think would miss some infections? I might have misread though. 🤔

 

Trivia - JVT for PM, he has the family history for it, his Grandad was prime minister of Vietnam 😲

[Snow Hill]

14 hours ago, pete14 said:

Of course the approval of the Oxford vaccine is excellent news but I wonder where the 12 week gap between vaccinations has come from. As far as I know, the efficacy and safety trials had a shorter gap and it is this that the efficacy percentage ratings were based on. The news I read is that the increased gap is as a result of new unpublished evidence. It just seems odd that this new unpublished evidence coincides with calls (including from Tony Blair) to give more people the first dose (likely to be half a dose with this vaccine) so that a greater number of people can receive some protection. This new approach may be the best way of administering the greatest protection to the greatest number, I sincerely hope it is, but until the new evidence is published, we won’t know whether it is the best way or just a cynical political way of manipulating the figures. 

It will be interesting to see whether other countries follow the same route of increasing gap between doses. 

[zap99]

4 hours ago, Mr.Clive Browne said:

My interpretation of the 70% is clearly at odds with yours and one others understanding of it.Just have to agree to disagree.

Does it matter which persons interpretation of learned papers has the biggest number. If I am offered a jab, I don't really care what someone's interpretation is. I will trust that the protection of the vaccine will be higher than not having it.

[wowzz]

4 hours ago, Mr.Clive Browne said:

My interpretation of the 70% is clearly at odds with yours and one others understanding of it.Just have to agree to disagree.

Fortunately Phil has far more  specialist knowledge than you,  so I will happily ignore your understanding. 

[zap99]

2 hours ago, yorkshirephil said:

Thank you Tring, very kind of you. I am not sure everyone shares your sentiment though😉. I wish the tv companies would make educational programmes where they could explain some of this information without bias, after all it is the most important aspect of so many peoples lives at the moment. I think a lot more people would be happy to have the vaccine if the consequences of not having it were explained.

Phill. Your credentials are clear. I wish some others offering their opinion here would state their area of expertise and their knowledge of the pharma industry, or virology. 

[zap99]

3 minutes ago, wowzz said:

Fortunately Phil has far more  specialist knowledge than you,  so I will happily ignore your understanding. 

I said that, but used more words. If I know little, but use lots of long words and say the same thing over and over and over........🤔

[wowzz]

3 hours ago, AnnieC said:

Agreed. The first couple of questions looked promising, then Sam Coates decided to ask four not particularly good questions and it was all downhill from there, particularly inews.

The interesting answer came  from Boris  when he said that "tens of millions of doses would be available by the end of March". I watched the interview a few times, so correct me if I am wrong.  

Firstly, "tens of millions", to my ears, implies at least 30 or 40 million, which is obviously not the case. 

Secondly,  availability is totally different to deliverability.  You could have 50 million  doses available,  but you will never be able to vaccinate everyone within two months, let alone two weeks.

Sometimes (most times) Boris should shut his mouth before trying to insert his foot. 

[terrierjohn]

7 hours ago, Selbourne said:

With respect, I think you have misunderstood. Why would they quote 70% if 100% are protected? Makes no sense. 

The figure, I believe, is extrapolated from the numbers of people who tested positive for the virus after they had been injected with the vaccine, but in reality no one knows how many people came into contact with the virus and showed no symptoms nor tested positive.

So its a bit like the ONS study where they test a number of people and from the results of that they guesstimate how many there will be in the rest of the population. From all that I have heard they assume a protection level from their analysis of the test group and give it a percentage figure.

This they quote as the efficacy, but I don't believe this means that "70%" will get protection whilst the other 30% get none, The efficacy is spread over everyone and some will achieve total protection, that is they will produce high levels of antibodies giving them full protection,  whilst others will have lower levels of antibodies and lesser protection, but probably sufficient to mean they have fewer or even no symptoms, and as JVT said they believe this will result in hardly any hospitalisations and almost zero deaths.

[Snow Hill]

It appears Pfizer don’t agree with JVT and governments plan for moving the doses out to 12 weeks apart as no testing has been done on that basis. This is a very risky strategy by the Government it would appear. 

 

“Pfizer said in a statement that decisions on dosing are up to health authorities, but that there's no data to show how the shot works if people don't get their second injection on time.

"The safety and efficacy of the vaccine has not been evaluated on different dosing schedules as the majority of trial participants received the second dose within the window specified in the study design," Pfizer and BioNTech said.”

[yorkshirephil]

49 minutes ago, Snow Hill said:

It appears Pfizer don’t agree with JVT and governments plan for moving the doses out to 12 weeks apart as no testing has been done on that basis. This is a very risky strategy by the Government it would appear. 

 

“Pfizer said in a statement that decisions on dosing are up to health authorities, but that there's no data to show how the shot works if people don't get their second injection on time.

"The safety and efficacy of the vaccine has not been evaluated on different dosing schedules as the majority of trial participants received the second dose within the window specified in the study design," Pfizer and BioNTech said.”

This doesn't surprise me, I was amazed when it was announced that the Pfizer vaccine second dose was to be extended from 3 to 12 weeks. Unless there is scientific rationale backed up by evidence I don't see how the government can justify the change. The pharma industry is committed to Good Manufacturing Procedures which are quite stringent, once a drug master file is submitted it is a mammoth and costly task to have even minor changes made. I would be surprised if there was enough wiggle room in the dosage parameters to make this change without MHRA reapproval. If the parameters were set so wide why state a 3 week interval if 12 weeks was acceptable and the vaccine could be spread out. I bet Pfizer are glad they have got indemnity from legal action if there are any issues in months/years to come.

[terrierjohn]

1 hour ago, Snow Hill said:

It appears Pfizer don’t agree with JVT and governments plan for moving the doses out to 12 weeks apart as no testing has been done on that basis. This is a very risky strategy by the Government it would appear. 

 

“Pfizer said in a statement that decisions on dosing are up to health authorities, but that there's no data to show how the shot works if people don't get their second injection on time.

"The safety and efficacy of the vaccine has not been evaluated on different dosing schedules as the majority of trial participants received the second dose within the window specified in the study design," Pfizer and BioNTech said.”

Then who provided the oft quoted figures that the Biontech vaccine had 90% efficacy after 1 jab and 94'1% after the 2nd. 

Did someone hack into the MHRA system?