Possible vaccines/treatment(s) for Coronavirus

[Wilf]

For international travel I've worked in places where they need to see a proof of Yellow Fever vaccination, so it won't be totally new to need proof of a vaccination for entry to a country.

I am optimistic about vaccines from what I've read, and am far from an anti-vaxxer, but I do have a slight concern that there's huge pressure to get them out, and I wonder if that will be a problem, less for safety and more for efficacy. Especially as the messaging pushed seems to be that they're the route 'back to normality' (urgh) even though plenty of people have made clear it's not as simple as that.

One of the reasons conspiracy theorists are such scum is they've polluted the space where a decent evaluation could be made of the vaccine process/possibilities. Like so many people, I've had a lot invested emotionally in the coming of vaccines. Same time, normally you'd be rather anxious about lives being put in the hands of drug companies and failed government's like our own and there's almost been a tangible ramping up of expectations and political pressure on the regulators (Hancock's 'hopes that x will happen in the next month' for example). It would be nice to have some kind of informed public discussion about what is a reasonable level of risk to take with early approval of vaccines Vs allowing the virus to run unchecked. But this is all happening amid commercial and political pressure and in a period where the public have had no voice of any sort. In fact the loons have been just about the only organised group. I'm certainly in favour of mass vaccination and will take whichever version I'm offered, unless genuine fears have emerged about whichever company that is by the time its my turn. I dunno though, I think its the same as with everything else in neo-liberal Britain, I just feel... disempowered.

 

[William of Walworth]

I posted below your post Wilf -- but I also want to post ..... because what you said was really thought-provoking

Big thank yous to the posts from 2hats and elbows also.

We need more time, clearly!

 

[Wilf]

I posted below your post Wilf -- but I also want to post ..... because what you said was really thought-provoking

Big thank yous to the pots from 2hats and elbows also.

We need more time, clearly!

Cheers William.

 

[two sheds]

Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine to undergo new global trial

Share price drops as critics question claim vaccine could protect up to 90% of people

www.theguardian.com

Some possible cold water:

It comes after the headline figure for the vaccine’s overall efficacy was put at 70% – as announced by the company on Monday and discussed in a press briefing by the Oxford researchers. But a sub-set of fewer than 3,000 people in the UK was given a lower dose regime – originally by accident – where the efficacy rose to 90%. In most trial volunteers in Brazil and the UK, it was 62%.

Sir Mene Pangalos, AstraZeneca’s head of biopharmaceuticals R&D, has confirmed that the low-dose trial included nobody over the age of 55. This led to concerns that younger age may have been a factor – particularly relevant given that vulnerable elderly people are most at risk from Covid-19.

They're extending the trials.

 

[William of Walworth]

Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine to undergo new global trial

Share price drops as critics question claim vaccine could protect up to 90% of people

www.theguardian.com

Some possible cold water :
[Other bit quoted from the article]
They're extending the trials.

I'm wanting to read that (bolded bit) as positive. I hope

 

[two sheds]

Interesting that the mistake they made by giving the first injection at lower strength seems by 'serendipity' to have increased protection, lets hope that holds true for older people too.

 

[Supine]

Trials are really complicated so probably best not to rely on press releases and articles based on them. The MHRA are world leaders in assessing very complicated trial data. Fingers crossed it works out OK.

We should do a sweepstake about which vaccine we all recieve

 

[Wilf]

Trials are really complicated so probably best not to rely on press releases and articles based on them. The MHRA are world leaders in assessing very complicated trial data. Fingers crossed it works out OK.

We should do a sweepstake about which vaccine we all recieve

A Russian one, obtained by a shell company operating out of the Cayman Islands, owned by Dominic Cummings.

 

[elbows]

A Russian one, obtained by a shell company operating out of the Cayman Islands, owned by Dominic Cummings.

Can be safely stored at room temperature in a backpack, and administered via the eyeballs.

 

[2hats]

Can be safely stored at room temperature in a backpack, and administered via the eyeballs a park bench or door handle in Salisbury.

FTFY.

 

[LDC]

Just waiting for my check-up and blood test 2 weeks after the second and final vaccine trial dose. Think they'll probably find more coffee than actual blood in the test.

 

[frogwoman]

According to the guardian people could start being vaccinated in 10 days time? I thought they still had to do another trial?

 

[belboid]

They’re proposing the Pfizer one. It still has to be certified for use but will be out straight after that.

 

[frogwoman]

I thought it was going to be the Oxford one?

 

[StoneRoad]

I suspect that "they" will use the 'higher efficiency' Pfizier / Moderna ones for the top priority / key workers / highly vulnerable and then use the Oxford one working down the priority / age lists; depending on future availability.

What's the betting that some politicians will want their jabs earlier ?

 

[belboid]

I thought it was going to be the Oxford one?

That does, as you say, still require further trials. But there are issues with how often you can safely move it so it will only be available in hospital

Hospitals in England told to prepare for Covid vaccine rollout in 10 days' time

Exclusive: NHS could receive first deliveries of Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine as soon as 7 December

www.theguardian.com

 

[Wilf]

... which is a let down for care home residents who, it turns out, won't be at the front of the queue as promised.

 

[LDC]

... which is a let down for care home residents who, it turns out, won't be at the front of the queue as promised.

I've not heard the government promise that, just the JCVI provisional advice list that had care home residents and staff as suggested first priority. The 'best' order is a bit disputed though, some younger people in the clinically extremely vulnerable category (shielding) have argued they should be higher up the list, and some countries are doing priority on quite a different way. If the first vaccine that became available was more efficacious in some groups (age for example) rather than others would make sense for those groups to get it first as well.

I think this change of it being NHS staff first is due ot the first vaccine being unable to be transported/moved and needing hospital conditions for the cold storage.

 

[elbows]

Before the provisional priority list was publicised, I always assumed NHS workers would get the vaccine first anyway. And logistics of vaccine delivery were only a small part of my thinking on that, I assumed they would be prioritised because the authorities would like to see if it makes a notable difference to hospital infection rates, which can have knock-on consequences for other sectors such as care homes. And because they probably hope it will give them more wiggle room in the staffing levels department, as it may lead to less staff being off sick at any given time, and may allow them to further fudge the self-isolation rules for staff.

 

[2hats]

Also easier to conduct on-going research data collection on efficacy, longevity and, potentially, any degree of sterilising immunity.

 

[Badgers]

MPs raise concerns over vaccine supply after Pfizer shuts cold storage site

Concerns have been raised about the risk of disruption to supplies of the Pfizer coronavirus vaccine and added costs after the drugs company shut a cold storag

www.thetimes.co.uk

 

[LDC]

The Guardian reporting some 'sensible celebrities' are going to front a campaign to convince people to have the vaccine.

Almost tempted to start a thread as to who would be the best and worst choices for this... (have to leave out the obvious ones like any politician though).

My quick guesses...

Best: Marcus Rashford?
Worst: Johnny Depp?

 

[Supine]

The Guardian reporting some 'sensible celebrities' are going to front a campaign to convince people to have the vaccine.

Almost tempted to start a thread as to who would be the best and worst choices for this... (have to leave out the obvious ones like any politician though).

My quick guesses...

Best: Marcus Rashford?
Worst: Shane McGowan?

Phil Mitchell. Best and worst

 

[LDC]

Phil Mitchell. Best and worst

Bah, you got in before my quick edit.

 

[StoneRoad]

Don't mind who they use to promote getting the vaccination.
It doesn't matter, as long as the campaign for works better than the anti's.

As soon as they announce the roll-out plans, I'm signing up !
(not that I expect to be in the first few tranches - I'm not in any of the highly vulnerable groups)

 

[weltweit]

Yep, I am signing up, even if the Now Show are correct and it comes from Monkey Poo The more people refuse the more vaccine there will be for the rest of us!

 

[mx wcfc]

I signed up for the testing programme (didn't get selected), so you can be pretty sure I'll be up for the jab as soon as I can.
NHS staff first is a no brainer. Then elderly and most clinically vulnerable.
Maybe put teachers and other key workers ahead of the 50-60 year olds?

 

[weltweit]

I was already selected for random background testing a few weeks ago. Got a test kit in the post to be collected by a courier. Negative result as expected.

 

[Epona]

I participated in the antigen research run by Imperial College, negative result (as expected).

I'll be way down the list for getting a vaccine but will of course have one when I am offered.

 

[William of Walworth]

I thought this article in yesterday's Observer about the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine, and about the 'debates' surrounding it atm, was interesting and quite well explained.

Oxford controversy is the first shot in international battle over vaccine efficacy
Trials will not reveal all the facts on prevention for each new drug – that process could last for years