Possible vaccines/treatment(s) for Coronavirus

[Sunray]

This GP has got a bit of a following, I like his presentation. This video is where he discusses the peer review of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine. The 1st peer review of any of the vaccines.



The biggest thing I take away from this, and it was mentioned by one of the creators of this vaccine. Once you got the 1st dose, nobody went to the hospital, nobody got very sick and nobody died. 100% efficacy. Going to be approved for use very soon and this will be the vaccine we and most of the world will get. Even though I have had C-19, can give my immune system a boost.

 

[Supine]

I think he's actually a teaching nurse rather than a doctor but yes very good. He has a couple of books on physiology that he's letting people download for free. Nice chap!

 

[weltweit]

Someone today said to me that the UKs first Vaccine only gives immunity for a few months. I don't know where they got that from - has anyone heard anything authoritative about this?

 

[Supine]

Someone today said to me that the UKs first Vaccine only gives immunity for a few months. I don't know where they got that from - has anyone heard anything authoritative about this?

There is only a few months data collected so far. Remember it's collected in real time so it'll take two years to find out how immunity pans out over two years.

 

[William of Walworth]

Comments on mixing two vaxx types ... potentially very interesting (omo, as a nonspecialist, obv)

'Mix-and-match' coronavirus vaccines to be tested - BBC News

Guardian version of that story, from yesterday :

UK trial to mix and match Covid vaccines to try to improve potency
Pilot planned for January will give subjects a shot of both Oxford/AstraZeneca and Pfizer/BioNTech versions

 

[Epona]

Good to know
Pfizer one not safe for people with strong allergic reactions

COVID-19 vaccine: UK regulators warn people with history of 'significant' allergic reactions not to have Pfizer/BioNTech jab

The Pfizer jab was approved for use last week by the regulator and was rolled out in hospitals on Tuesday.

news.sky.com

To be fair, I don't think this is a particularly new phenomenon entirely (somewhat based on how each vaccine is made) - my brother can't always have vaccines because of a history of anaphylactic reactions and that has been the case for decades with a variety of vaccines. People can have anaphylaxis as a result of all sorts of things that can come on suddenly - with my brother it was eggs, and I was ok with peanuts for 35 years of my life. As I am not in a priority group right now I will probably be getting one of the other vaccines when it rolls out to my no-priority group next year - as I have serious allergies I will as always discuss whether any particular vaccine is suitable for me.

 

[William of Walworth]

Sasaferrato also raised the allergy subject on the 'Vaccine priority' thread.

Are there any figures anywhere suggesting what proportion/%age of people suffer from allergies overall?

I suppose it's too soon to know what proportion are likely to be allergy-affected by Covid-19 vaccine(s) ...

But were there figures from clinical trials specifically on allergies, does anyone know?

Cheers (in pre-work rush, otherwise I'd check Dr Google )..

 

[nyxx]

I think if the trials were on self selected volunteers it’s unlikely that many of them had severe allergies, you just wouldn’t take the chance, no?

 

[magneze]

I don't know how these things work but I'd like to think that they specifically test this scenario with selected volunteers. Clearly not though.

 

[William of Walworth]

I think if the trials were on self selected volunteers it’s unlikely that many of them had severe allergies, you just wouldn’t take the chance, no?

Point taken -- AFAIK I'm not myself allergic to anything (so far!) but I was in part concerned about to what extent allergies were considered/looked-out-for during clinical trials of the vaccines.......

But my questions were also about percentage of people generally who are at risk of allergic reactions to anything.

 

[mx wcfc]

I think if the trials were on self selected volunteers it’s unlikely that many of them had severe allergies, you just wouldn’t take the chance, no?

Lots of people volunteered for the trials. There were a lot of medical questions on the application form. I can't remember whether allergies was one, but there was also an in depth medical before trialists were selected. So I would expect that they would filter out anyone with particular medical conditions - maybe they excluded people with a lot of allergic reactions.

That may have been a mistake, but equally, at a time when getting a vaccine that worked for most people was the priority, and really urgent, focussing on a small number of people with particular conditions wasn't on the agenda.

I hear what you're saying about self selection, but I volunteered for the trials because I thought it might be useful for the researchers to try it out on over weight, unfit, older, type 2 diabetics. They didn't pick me. Maybe they did "pick" the two NHS workers who fell ill. Working in the NHS you would think they might be aware of the possibility. Dunno, perhaps that's unfair.

 

[two sheds]

Worked out fair enough though - people with allergies avoid the vaccine, we've found out by two bad reactions after the trials. If they'd had them during the trials it might have suggested the vaccine wasn't safe and put people off?

 

[mx wcfc]

Worked out fair enough though - people with allergies avoid the vaccine, we've found out by two bad reactions after the trials. If they'd had them during the trials it might have suggested the vaccine wasn't safe and put people off?

I think that's the gist of it, yes. And because they were vaccinated in a hospital environment, rather than at their local GP, they were at least in the best care immediately.

 

[William of Walworth]

Somewhat dispiriting Guardian report from today about big reservations at this stage -- mostly in the US -- about the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine

Covid vaccines: US regulator sceptical over AstraZeneca model
Vaccine developed in Oxford criticised by FDA with efficacy rates and trials delaying official take-up

It is clear that in spite of the critical need for coronavirus vaccines, the Food and Drug Administration is not going to rush to approve the vaccine developed by Oxford University and AstraZeneca, even though the US, through its “Operation Warp Speed”, has put in substantial funding and ordered 300m doses.

and

The Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine has been the subject of withering criticism in the US media. It has suffered by comparison with Pfizer and Moderna, whose vaccines, manufactured with a different and novel technology, have effectively scored straight As.

I'm hoping that the US FDA ends up being able to make less critical/less less hostile conclusions in the end --approval looks to be near-definitely delayed in the US though

The (UK) MHRA still seems likely to end up approving the Oxford/AV vaccine sooner .... let's hope so, anyway!

 

[William of Walworth]

And here's The Lancet's study on the Oxford/AstraZenec vaccine, published two days ago -- I don't think anyone's linked to this yet?

It's very detailed and pretty technical, I struggled so I'll have to get back to it at some point in my upcoming days off ...

 

[StoneRoad]

Sorry to sound so scathing, but my cynical prejudice about the fda / american system really makes me wonder if their problem with the oxford vaccine is "not invented here" and that it is "low tech" (fridge) storage and quite cheap (so less profit).

 

[mx wcfc]

Somewhat dispiriting Guardian report from today about big reservations at this stage -- mostly in the US -- about the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine





and



I'm hoping that the US FDA ends up being able to make less critical/less less hostile conclusions in the end --approval looks to be near-definitely delayed in the US though

The (UK) MHRA still seems likely to end up approving the Oxford/AV vaccine sooner .... let's hope so, anyway!

TBH, if the US get the Pfizer one, and we get the Oxford one, does it matter? The US being the US will always buy local. The "70% effective" headline that gets attached to the Oxford vaccine is misleading isn't it, as they've found a permutation that's 90%+? If the US doesn't want the Oxford/AZ one, there's more of it for us and other countries?

 

[William of Walworth]

StoneRoad mx wcfc : I really hope you're both correct about that!

I did get the impression that the FDA was more professional than to be as flagwaving as that, though .......

 

[elbows]

The "70% effective" headline that gets attached to the Oxford vaccine is misleading isn't it, as they've found a permutation that's 90%+?

If memory serves me correctly their original trials didnt have people over 55 trying that permutation so thats one of the reasons opinions are mixed.

Personally the way I think of it at this point is that most of my judgement is reserved for the future, but that the Oxford one has a different set of known strengths and weaknesses at this stage. Cheaper and easier to handle, but probably not as protective. I expect my opinions to evolve as reality slowly fills in some of the remaining large knowledge gaps.

 

[weltweit]

My impression is that the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine didn't do its testing in a straightforward way which makes it a bit less straightforward to approve. The method to get to 90% + for example was discovered by mistake, when initial half doses were given followed up with a full dose. And that was not with a very large sample which might give less confidence than the more straight forward trials the other two candidates carried out.

 

[Supine]

FDA are definitely more professional than that, even in the world of Trump America. The Oxford vaccine has some minor issues in lab method development (which isn't unusual) and the age / race of the study cohorts wasn't as wide ranging. Mid term outlook is just as good as the other vaccines though.

We're talking about a few weeks or months difference from project start to roll out for vaccines that positively impact human health. All the players should be praised.

If some of the vaccines in development don't work out then so be it. It's great we have some that work

The interesting thing for me is how long they work for. Time will tell.

 

[Cloo]

Encouraging, but don't-know-how-accurate article suggesting something I was hoping, which is that vaccinating even the small % of the population most vulnerable cuts the overall risk by a significant amount: How Covid-19 vaccines could rapidly reduce the UK’s death rate

 

[Cloo]

Also, North London health trusts have put out a residents survey that I've replied to about where people might be happy to go for vaccines (both in terms of distance and what kind of venue) which seems like a smart idea to plan spread of places to do it. For any other Barnet, Camden, Enfield, Haringey and Islington residents who may be interested: Residents survey - COVID-19 vaccinations in North Central London - North Central London CCG

 

[Supine]

Encouraging, but don't-know-how-accurate article suggesting something I was hoping, which is that vaccinating even the small % of the population most vulnerable cuts the overall risk by a significant amount: How Covid-19 vaccines could rapidly reduce the UK’s death rate

It cuts the risk of death because those people are being injected. It doesnt impact overall community risk of infection until herd immunity is reached.

Obviously the first priority is to stop people dieing. After that it's to help people avoid getting long covid or 'bad flu'.

 

[Supine]

FDA advisory committee results are in for the Pfizer vaccine approval.

Yes 17
No 4
Abstain 1

I do hope they start vaccination soon.

 

[Supine]

It's all happening at the moment.

Sanofi vaccine didn't work well enough so they are going back for more development work

Reuters | Breaking International News & Views

Find latest news from every corner of the globe at Reuters.com, your online source for breaking international news coverage.

uk.reuters.com

And the CSL / Melbourne vaccine has also fallen during early studies

Covid: Australian vaccine abandoned over false HIV response

Trials of the Australian vaccine returned false-positive HIV tests, but did not harm participants.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[cupid_stunt]

Encouraging, but don't-know-how-accurate article suggesting something I was hoping, which is that vaccinating even the small % of the population most vulnerable cuts the overall risk by a significant amount: How Covid-19 vaccines could rapidly reduce the UK’s death rate

As Supine said, it reduces the number of deaths by a significant amount, which is certainly a good starting point.

My SiS, retired head of an NHS lab who went back p/t earlier this year to help out, was talking about exactly what's covered in that article, last weekend, expressing the view there should be a big reduction in deaths by the end of Feb. Her fear is restrictions will be lifted too soon, and there will be a massive breakdown in social distancing & mask wearing from that point, when we would need them for at least another couple of months to really see the vaccines impacting on the wider community.

 

[cupid_stunt]

It's all happening at the moment.

Sanofi vaccine didn't work well enough so they are going back for more development work

Reuters | Breaking International News & Views

Find latest news from every corner of the globe at Reuters.com, your online source for breaking international news coverage.

uk.reuters.com

And the CSL / Melbourne vaccine has also fallen during early studies

Covid: Australian vaccine abandoned over false HIV response

Trials of the Australian vaccine returned false-positive HIV tests, but did not harm participants.

www.bbc.co.uk

Sad news, but OTOH we always knew that not all vaccines being developed would work and/or get approval, and I suppose these failures can be held up as evidence of how successful and safe are the ones that actually do get approval.

 

[Badgers]

Much as I detest his face, voice and incompetence I did listen to Matthew Handcocks pathetic address yesterday.

Understand that immunity will kick in until approx 7 days (specific ) after the second dose of vaccine is administered?

Also that those vaccinated can still spread the virus to others who are 'part vaccinated' or in a lower priority group?

 

[Cloo]

Yup, you can't just go and see grandma like normal unless you're vaccinated, as she can still give it to you.