Covid 19 CRISIS

Dr_Grip said:
So, we got interim data from AstraZeneca/Oxford. As mainstream news report "only" 70% efficiacy, I am waiting for Derek Lowe's take, since the real news from the press release seems to be a lot better:


So, to me as a layman it looks like the lower dosing regimen actually provides protection at roughly the same level as the mRNA candidates. A 5% lower protection level seems like an ok tradeoff for storage in a standard fridge, especially trying to bring the vaccine to rural communities and developing countries. But again, I am not a pharmacologist, so let's wait for Derek to weigh in.

EDIT: Maybe it's my PhD on Morality of Warfare getting the better of me, but it feels like there is a certain gloating in the German press that the British vaccine is "only 70%" effective, with the German product being vastly superior. Understanding that Oxford tested two different dosing regimens should be within the grasp of even the intern feeding the 24 hour covid news ticker.
Click to expand...
I think that's because they were first with the results. Just be glad it's not a stars and stripes vaccine...
 
So, Derek Lowe weighs in on the AZ results. He is noticably less excited than about the Moderna and BioNtech/Pfizer numbers.
This interim analysis was run when 131 cases had been accrued across trials in the UK, Brazil, and South Africa across about 24,000 trial participants (treatment and control groups). In the treatment group, 8,895 participants received two full doses of the vaccine, spaced one month apart, and 2,741 patients got a half dose at first, followed by a full dose a month later. And the efficacy rates for these two dosing regimes were very different: 62% for the two-full-dose group and 90% for the half/full group. I do not see a breakdown of how those 131 cases partitioned across the two groups, but the overall N has to be higher for the first, doesn’t it? I’d like to know what the statistics are for the 90% efficacy number, for sure.

Why might there be such a significant split in efficacy? My own wild guess is that perhaps the two-full-dose protocol raised too many antibodies to the adenovirus vector itself, and made the second dose less effective. This has always been a concern with the viral-vector idea.
[...]
If this vaccine is going to be deployed, the half-dose/full-dose regime is the obvious choice, since otherwise you can do the same amount of work dosing your population, use up more vaccine. doing it, and get notably worse results.
Click to expand...
He points out that there is a (low, but existing) chance that the 90% number is a statistical outlier due to a low number of cases in the half/full group.

He also comments on the overall landscape so far:
[The Oxford/AZ vaccine] could still be an effective weapon in the pandemic, but the stories are starting to differentiate. Pfizer (very effective, tough distribution and storage), Moderna (very effective, easier distribution/storage than Pfizer, but perhaps stronger safety reactions), and now Oxford/AZ (widely varying efficacy depending on dosing, easier distribution/storage, safety details TBD).
Click to expand...
 
Ok, I know it's been said before, but can I also say, thank you so much @Dr_Grip for your digestion and updates in this thread. It's been super informative.

It's also been really interesting and helpful to hear updates from everyone in all parts as well as it lends perspective.
 
So guess who's been exposed to covid again and has to quarantine for another 2 weeks? My sister! YAY! And no, she can't get fucking tested just like before!
 
“I hereby appeal to the people of the state to take every possible precaution against the spread of this disease. I urge, as far as possible, that all public gatherings be dispensed with, and upon the first appearance of the disease in any community the public schools be closed, and our citizens refrain from traveling.

I request that the mayors of the cities and towns of the state and the local health authorities take such further steps in the matter as may be necessary to control the situation and prevent the spread of the disease, and I appeal for the hearty co-operation on the part of all our people with the authorities to the end that this menace may be brought under control.”

A rather warm, caring, and compassionate statement from the Missouri Gov............ in 1918!

This is what fuckshit Parson has to say.

“The emphasis that are put on by some media outlets is like I am opposed to wearing a mask. I have never been opposed to that,” Parson said. “What I am opposed of is mandates from this position to the people of this state. People on the local level should have a voice.”
 
Do you remember in April/May when he was trying to make it so cities like STL couldn't actually pass any measures that were stricter than what had been issued state wide?

"This is all on you to deal with and regulate, but only if you do it without hurting people's fee fees"
 
Missed that somehow. But sounds about right.

On your sister getting tested, Walmart is doing it here at their Neighborhood Market locations. I signed up through Quest Diagnostics website, sat in line for quite sometime, then waited a week for the results. It's better than nothing, but just barely.
 
5E431940-B16D-4D5A-BD75-63B6FE074AD2.jpeg
 
She's already made calls, and basically she can't get tested unless she's actively showing symptoms or the person who exposed her is showing them, and this is with insurance. There is some free testing here on this side of the river, even without insurance (me), but there's a lot of hoops you have to jump through just to apply.

If you haven't seen it yet, there's a new website that you punch your zip into and it will tell you how high risk your area is. Mine is currently 95 out of 100. https://healthweather.us/
 
Punisher Bass said:
She's already made calls, and basically she can't get tested unless she's actively showing symptoms
Click to expand...
Simple solution (which I used): Lie. There is no way a doctor can tell whether you experience a sore throat or not.
 
 
Here's a thought: AstraZeneca/Oxford are in the weird position of delivering exactly the vaccine everyone expected, but since everyone else seems to be overdelivering, it might just not be enough. Also, it seems they botched their Phase III trial with a dosing error, leading to the "half/full" regime being tested first place.

This is a great chance for regulators to boost vaccine confidence by not approving the AZ/Oxford vaccince. I am not saying it's bad or dangerous, but given that it's 20% less effective than not only Moderna and Pfizer, but also than what we know in terms of early data from the Russian Sputnik-V and the Chinese SinoVac effort, it's just not good enough.

It's advantages in distribution (cooler instead of freezer storage) and price (1/10th of the competitors) will make it a surefire hit with developing nations, but for the US and EU, who can master the distribution challenges of the mRNA vaccines and can afford them, there's just no need to approve the Oxford effort, on the contrary, it would play into the anti-vaxxer "regulators are desperate and will approve anything" narrative.

As an unrelated second point, it seems the predictive power of animal models seems to be high in Covid vaccines, if we look back at this comparision from July, which put AZ/Oxford quite a way behind the other frontrunners in terms of antibody response.

EDIT/UPDATE: the more I learn about the Oxford trial the clearer it is that they will not be in a position to submit an EUA request for quite some time to come, probably/possibly making my point above moot. Their current plan seems to be to switch the remainder of their US trial participants to the half/full dosing, and thus getting at least 10K+ participants behind that dosing (up from 2.2K right now). This factually means restarting the Phase 3 trial now.
It puts them behind J&J and Novavax (as well as Sputnik-V and two to three of the Chinese vaccines), all of which are expected to report on Phase 3 results before the year's over. Instead, they now are in the same timeframe as Merck, GSK/Sanofi and even CureVac, who all are planning to start Phase 3 trials before Christmas.
 
Last edited:
Which if I'm honest, I would prefer the restart, larger pool of testing than something rushed. The last thing we need is good enough and possibly finding out something not so great.

Though, I also am not sure if whomever is first to market is one I would want right away either. This is hard for me to fully understand because, while I know the drive for a vaccine for this type of virus isn't new, and there have been incredible new testing procedures to make the turnaround faster, I'm a bit leery on trusting it at this moment. If I come privy to better information closer to the release of the vaccine, will I change my mind. For now, I will sit, watch, and wait.
 
93Flareside said:
Though, I also am not sure if whomever is first to market is one I would want right away either. This is hard for me to fully understand because, while I know the drive for a vaccine for this type of virus isn't new, and there have been incredible new testing procedures to make the turnaround faster, I'm a bit leery on trusting it at this moment. If I come privy to better information closer to the release of the vaccine, will I change my mind. For now, I will sit, watch, and wait.
Click to expand...
You're probably not getting it right away anyway, the first batches are going to medical personnel and similar groups.
 
93Flareside said:
Though, I also am not sure if whomever is first to market is one I would want right away either. This is hard for me to fully understand because, while I know the drive for a vaccine for this type of virus isn't new, and there have been incredible new testing procedures to make the turnaround faster, I'm a bit leery on trusting it at this moment. If I come privy to better information closer to the release of the vaccine, will I change my mind. For now, I will sit, watch, and wait.
Click to expand...
I have religiously followed the vaccine trials. Let me assure you, the only corner that is being cut compared to non-pandemic approval is the mid-term security (two months vs. a year). The rest of the speeding up of the development process is done through actually working hand in hand - normally, after Phase 1 the pharma company needs weeks to compile the results, then they submit them for Phase 2 approval, then the regulator lets the submission lie on a stack of paper for three months until finally approving it, then the company sets up Phase 2, and so on, and so on. What we have now is the process actually being as efficient as it should be all the time.

I, for one, will take the vaccine (Moderna/Pfizer) as soon as possible and I encourage everyone to do the same. The less people "wait and see", the quicker we are out of this shit.
 
Dr_Grip said:
I have religiously followed the vaccine trials. Let me assure you, the only corner that is being cut compared to non-pandemic approval is the mid-term security (two months vs. a year). The rest of the speeding up of the development process is done through actually working hand in hand - normally, after Phase 1 the pharma company needs weeks to compile the results, then they submit them for Phase 2 approval, then the regulator lets the submission lie on a stack of paper for three months until finally approving it, then the company sets up Phase 2, and so on, and so on. What we have now is the process actually being as efficient as it should be all the time.

I, for one, will take the vaccine (Moderna/Pfizer) as soon as possible and I encourage everyone to do the same. The less people "wait and see", the quicker we are out of this shit.
Click to expand...

Ok, that's good.
 
Dr_Grip said:
I, for one, will take the vaccine (Moderna/Pfizer) as soon as possible and I encourage everyone to do the same. The less people "wait and see", the quicker we are out of this shit.
Click to expand...
This. I'm hoping for the middle of the mass inoculation period, when the first priority groups are done but it's still a mass operation.
 
narf said:
This. I'm hoping for the middle of the mass inoculation period, when the first priority groups are done but it's still a mass operation.
Click to expand...
If in the first weeks enough people don't show up for their vaccination appointments, I am sure there will be a waiting list/queue for people to take up the open slots. Consequently, I hope that be being enough of a pain in the ass I will be able to get vaccinated within Q1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top