Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Possible vaccines/treatment(s) for Coronavirus

teuchter said:
See post no. 200 above.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's an important step, but producing an immune response isn't the same as demonstrating long differences between the control group and vaccine group (afaik). It's that bit I'm wondering about and whether the talk of a 'Christmas+ rollout' implies early evidence of effectiveness.
 
Wilf said:
Yes, that's an important step, but producing an immune response isn't the same as demonstrating long differences between the control group and vaccine group (afaik). It's that bit I'm wondering about and whether the talk of a 'Christmas+ rollout' implies early evidence of effectiveness.
Click to expand...
I'm more inclined to view it as a political hope, TBH...
 
LynnDoyleCooper said:
That's brilliant, thanks! Although I'm mildly disturbed at how low the figures for people that have had the vaccine trial I've had are!
Click to expand...
Yes, it really is useful and answers some of the questions I've had. Kept clicking and clicking, getting more detail! ONe thing it showed to me is how much the Oxford Zeneca trial is reliant on US data. Presumably that's all under US FDA rules and explains why the US imposed pause a couple of weeks was actually quite important? I'm guessing, but this gives me new avenues to flaunt my ignorance. :oldthumbsup:
 
Repetition-attack here :oops:, but this is a re-post of my very recent post from the main Coronavirus UK thread :


cupid_stunt said:
Dr Anthony Fauci was interviewed on the Andrew Marr Show this morning, well worth watching, and he suggested that if a vaccine was approved by the end of
next month, by the time enough doses were produced and administered to enough people, we could be looking to return to 'some form of normal' sometime during the third quarter next year, so between July & Sept.
Click to expand...

Wilf said:
TBH, I'd settle for that.
Click to expand...
:)
William of Walworth said:
In reaction to my favourite Corona-subject above, I posted a good while ago (not at all sure now which thread though :oops: ) that I thought Fauci (on vaccine timesales) was simultaneously being over-optimistic (about vaccine could be ready by Xmas) AND over-pessimistic (about vaccine can't be distributed properly/widely enough until July, etc.)
I don't really get** the pessimism about vaccine distribution/dispensing, or about the negativity aabout the timing thereof.

Huge amounts of reasearch, and money, are going into vaccine trials, many of which are heading towards phase 3 by now.
Many Western/1st World** Govts at least. seem to be making big efforts to reserving supplies. Big Pharma who have the good vaccine supplies will welcome the promise of money and good publicity about that.
**I do fully understand why access to vaccines for developing-world countries will be a nightmare :(
So obviously, that's likely to be utterly shite for the developing world :(

But I very honestly doubt that once safe/reliable vaccines get approved in well regulating/safety-rule focussed countries, there'd be too much trouble in those countries with making them as widely available as possible -- production and distribution would surely? be prioritised big-style.

Given what a huge game-changer a safe vaccine could mean .......
Click to expand...

Want thoughts please!! :)
 
@William of Walworth -
In reaction to my favourite Corona-subject above, I posted a good while ago (not at all sure now which thread though :oops: ) that I thought Fauci (on vaccine timesales) was simultaneously being over-optimistic (about vaccine could be ready by Xmas) AND over-pessimistic (about vaccine can't be distributed properly/widely enough until July, etc.)
I don't really get** the pessimism about vaccine distribution/dispensing, or about the negativity about the timing thereof.
Click to expand...

William of Walworth, he didn't say 'can't be distributed properly/widely enough until July', he said it'll take to at least July 2021 to have administered it to enough people, basically to reach some sort of herd immunity. See from 3 minutes in - BBC One - The Andrew Marr Show, 25/10/2020, Dr Anthony Fauci: 'Coronavirus vaccine roll-out won't come till 2021'

Just think of the sheer numbers involved, in the UK if they are looking at over 40 million, with 2 doses each (based on reports about the Oxford vaccine), you need 80 million doses manufactured, distributed to 'jab centres', then administered by a limited pool of trained staff. 80 / 6 months, means you would be injecting 13.3 million per month, that's one hell of an operation.
 
cupid_stunt said:
William of Walworth, he didn't say 'can't be distributed properly/widely enough until July', he said it'll take to at least July 2021 to have administered it to enough people, basically to reach some sort of herd immunity. See from 3 minutes in - BBC One - The Andrew Marr Show, 25/10/2020, Dr Anthony Fauci: 'Coronavirus vaccine roll-out won't come till 2021'

Just think of the sheer numbers involved, in the UK if they are looking at over 40 million, with 2 doses each (based on reports about the Oxford vaccine), you need 80 million doses manufactured, distributed to 'jab centres', then administered by a limited pool of trained staff. 80 / 6 months, means you would be injecting 13.3 million per month, that's one hell of an operation.
Click to expand...

Someone I know been recruited as a 'vaccine admin' person. AFAIK it's to do the paperwork etc. to free up the HCPs to do the actual injections to speed the process up. If the vaccine comes out it'll probably be the largest single logistics operation in living memory.
 
LynnDoyleCooper said:
Also we're going to get an huge increase in the anti-vax stuff when/if the vaccine comes out. I hope there's some people putting some thought into how to counter that now.
Click to expand...

I think the best answer to it is probably to simply go and get vaccinated when it is our turn for each of us - I imagine highly vulnerable people will be higher in the queue than I am and any successful vaccine will take a while to roll out across the population. It depends what percentage of the population are refusing a vaccine really, but I think getting vaccinated will be the best counter.

The main worry really is that there is a % of the population who will likely not be able to have a vaccination - not due to being a conspiraloon, but due to allergies or health factors - my brother can't have all vaccines and has to be careful due to severe allergic reactions in some cases, for example, I would expect him to not be vaccinated right away if at all if it might put his life at risk - but the more of us who are able to have a vaccine and do so, the better the protection for those people.
 
Last edited:
Epona said:
I think the best answer to it is probably to simply go and get vaccinated when it is our turn for each of us - I imagine highly vulnerable people will be higher in the queue than I am and any successful vaccine will take a while to roll out across the population. It depends what percentage of the population are refusing a vaccine really, but I think getting vaccinated will be the best counter.

The main worry really is that there is a % of the population who will likely not be able to have a vaccination - not due to being a conspiraloon, but due to allergies or health factors - my brother can't have all vaccines and has to be careful due to severe allergic reactions in some cases, for example, I would expect him to not be vaccinated right away if at all if it might put his life at risk - but the more of us who are able to have a vaccine and do so, the better the protection for those people.
Click to expand...

Of course we should have vaccine when it comes out, but that is unlikely to help counter the anti-vax crowd. Maybe some more active measures like public health messaging etc. might be needed.

It's a very, very small number of people that can't have vaccines due to an allergic reaction. Not sure the percentage re: health conditions that make them unable to have one either, imagine it's dependent on the vaccine type and health condition rather than a blanket unable to have any vaccines.
 
LynnDoyleCooper said:
Of course we should have vaccine when it comes out, but that is unlikely to help counter the anti-vax crowd. Maybe some more active measures like public health messaging etc. might be needed.

It's a very, very small number of people that can't have vaccines due to an allergic reaction. Not sure the percentage re: health conditions that make them unable to have one either, imagine it's dependent on the vaccine type and health condition rather than a blanket unable to have any vaccines.
Click to expand...

Oh for sure, I am just speaking from the perspective of I know my brother cannot have certain vaccines that involve egg protein because of a high risk of anaphylactic shock - I don't think it is that common, but our aim should be to protect people who cannot have a vaccine by getting a vaccine ourselves when we can do so. If (for example) my brother is unable to get a vaccine himself, then if most of the people he comes into contact with have been vaccinated, it protects him also.
 
In terms of how to convince people who are anti-vaccine? I am not sure how,

I watched a good documentary not long ago about Polio and development of the Salk vaccine - Polio is now eradicated in all but 2 countries worldwide, and those 2 are ones that have had wars going on and it has been difficult to get vaccines to children. That was as terrifying in its time (if not more so) as Coronavirus is now, although affecting different age groups severely.

Maybe just show them that, so they know what polio used to do to people before there was a vaccine, children dying or ending up on iron lungs due to paralysis etc Bans on people congregating etc. None of this is brand new, previous generations have been through forms of lockdown for other viruses.
 
Last edited:
teuchter said:
Although I'll claim to be immune to any sense of patriotism - in a year where it feels like the UK is a complete basket case, it's perhaps pleasing to see a UK based vaccine project among the most promising candidates.
Click to expand...

Agreed. There is a very very long list of scientists and engineers who have been working 18hrs a day for 6-7 days per week since Feb. Kudos to all of them.
 
teuchter said:
Some of them, you just can't.

They have a kind of immunity to evidence.
Click to expand...

All this conspiraloon and anti-science stuff isn't new, we just thought that in modern times people would be less susceptible to it than during plagues in the middle ages where people blamed witches or cats.

Now the superstition is about 5G towers and microchips/nanotech being given with vaccines.

It is equally ridiculous and shows that we probably haven't moved on as much as we would like.
 
LynnDoyleCooper said:
Also we're going to get an huge increase in the anti-vax stuff when/if the vaccine comes out. I hope there's some people putting some thought into how to counter that now.
Click to expand...

Dont worry, I've already submitted my pitch for a new reality tv show, 'anti-vax island'. Some of the detail is subject to change, but it would certainly involve the introduction of diseases into the assembled anti-vax population. Viewers may be encouaged to vote for their favourite stars of the show each week, who will be vaccinated and thus saved from the elimination rounds, whilst those coming bottom of the poll are placed at maximum risk via a series of challenges in risky scenarios.
 
Monkeygrinder's Organ said:
Even quite a targeted initial release would have quite a big effect quite quickly I think. Not 'back to normal' but I'd certainly feel a lot better if my parents had it and I'm sure a huge number of people would feel the same.
Click to expand...

I dunno. I actually think there is a good argument to prioritise age groups from 10 upwards and working age adults. These are the groups that are spreading it the most and a lot of vaccines we have at the moment are not very effective in older people anyway.

If / when we get a vaccine it may be OK for the older and more vulnerable but with already weakened immune systems there is a fair chance it won't be that great. We may be better of targeting those who are spreading it. All speculation, mind.
 
Teaboy said:
I dunno. I actually think there is a good argument to prioritise age groups from 10 upwards and working age adults. These are the groups that are spreading it the most and a lot of vaccines we have at the moment are not very effective in older people anyway.

If / when we get a vaccine it may be OK for the older and more vulnerable but with already weakened immune systems there is a fair chance it won't be that great. We may be better of targeting those who are spreading it. All speculation, mind.
Click to expand...

Fair points - of course we don't actually know what any potential vaccine might actually do so any rollout would need to be tailored to that, there wouldn't be any point administering vaccines where it wouldn't be effective.

I'm not sure about the targetting groups that are spreading it though. If it's spreading less in older people isn't that because they're more likely to be shiedling due to their high level of risk? That's a potentially pretty dodgy line of reasoning for denying it to them I think.
 
Monkeygrinder's Organ said:
Fair points - of course we don't actually know what any potential vaccine might actually do so any rollout would need to be tailored to that, there wouldn't be any point administering vaccines where it wouldn't be effective.

I'm not sure about the targetting groups that are spreading it though. If it's spreading less in older people isn't that because they're more likely to be shiedling due to their high level of risk? That's a potentially pretty dodgy line of reasoning for denying it to them I think.
Click to expand...

Sure but the query is about which approach is best to protect the vulnerable. If it turns out that there is a vaccine but it offers limited protection to the elderly it may be a better approach (as in lives saved) to try as much as possible to prevent them being exposed to the virus. The best way to do that would be to target the groups that spread it the most.

I know it sounds a bit counter productive and I don't think it will happen. I just worry that like many vaccines we have now it may not be very effective for a lot of the most vulnerable. What could happen in that scenario is that there will become a perception that the vaccine has fixed everything, the vulnerable are protected and we can all go back to normal. Meanwhile the virus continues to circulate around society (even more so with the latest information on acquired immunity) and people carry on dying behind closed doors. There is already enough people out there pushing for back to normal and forget about all the deaths happening. Imagine what it will be like if a vaccine is out there?

As I say though this is all speculation as there is no vaccine yet and its far too early to say how effective any future vaccine might be in different age groups.
 
How effective are vaccines generally? I know flu vaccine has only up to 60%ish effectiveness but that's mainly because there are quite a few different strains and if the the one you get isn't included in the vaccine then it won't protect against it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Covid vaccines for 24-25
2
Replies
39
Views
1K
Kid_Eternity
Kid_Eternity
B
Will you be getting a private covid vaccination?
2 3
Replies
69
Views
2K
MrCurry
MrCurry
editor
Professional football and coronavirus
Replies
6
Views
571
elbows
elbows
frogwoman
Vaccine trials
2
Replies
57
Views
2K
frogwoman
frogwoman
Riklet
Possible serious side effects from the Astra Zeneca vaccine discussion
14 15 16 17 18
Replies
518
Views
21K
Happy Tree
Happy Tree
Back
Top Bottom