# Possible vaccines/treatment(s) for Coronavirus



## cupid_stunt (Mar 10, 2020)

A thread for hopefully positive news on the fight back against this coronavirus.

I remember Chris Whitty, England's  Chief Medical Officer, mentioning some exiting antiviral drugs could be effective in treatment of this coronavirus, and there are three particular ones that could be good candidates. The advantage of using exiting drugs is clear, a rapid increase in production could be done far quicker than waiting for any new drugs to go through the many stages of clinical trials, and then go into production.

Well, it's seems China has got good results from one already...



> *Favilavir, the first approved coronavirus drug in China*
> The National Medical Products Administration of China has approved the use of Favilavir, an anti-viral drug, as a treatment for coronavirus. The drug has reportedly shown efficacy in treating the disease with minimal side effects in a clinical trial involving 70 patients. The clinical trial is being conducted in Shenzhen, Guangdong province.











						Coronavirus treatment: Vaccines/drugs in the pipeline for COVID-19
					

Coronavirus drugs: Here are five major coronavirus vaccines and drugs being developed for the treatment of Wuhan coronavirus. coronavirus medicine; corona virus cure; coronavirus cure update, coronavirus cure, coronavirus vaccine update, cure for coronavirus, coronavirus treatment update




					www.clinicaltrialsarena.com


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 10, 2020)

Remdesivir is another frontrunner.



> The first clinical trial of the antiviral medicine remdesivir in Covid-19 patients is due to report its findings next month according to Gilead Sciences, which said it had accelerated manufacturing of the drug to increase its supplies “as rapidly as possible”.
> 
> As the coronavirus outbreak has unfolded, about 300 separate trials into different drugs and experimental therapies have been launched in the absence of any established treatments. Many see remdesivir, originally developed to treat Ebola, as a frontrunner and one of the very few drugs that has a reasonable prospect of helping patients in the near-term.











						Hopes rise over experimental drug's effectiveness against coronavirus
					

Many see remdesivir as one of few drugs that has reasonable prospect of helping patients




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Steel Icarus (Mar 10, 2020)

Why have they all got Lord of the Rings names tho


----------



## elbows (Mar 10, 2020)

Because the vir at the end of the name means antiviral.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 10, 2020)

cupid_stunt well done for picking up on that, I saw his recent interview in the commons when he mentioned the drugs but didn't think to follow them up at all.


----------



## Part-timah (Mar 10, 2020)

Don’t get yer hopes up or waste your effort mentally investing in this. Prepare yourself and organise with those around you.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 10, 2020)

Part-timah said:


> Don’t get yer hopes up or waste your effort mentally investing in this. Prepare yourself and organise with those around you.



This thread is for positive news, so fuck off with your doom & gloom.


----------



## StoneRoad (Mar 10, 2020)

Well spotted, thank you cupid_stunt ...

Something already on the approved list has advantages.


----------



## cyril_smear (Mar 10, 2020)

Drinking bleach apparently


----------



## Callie (Mar 10, 2020)

cyril_smear said:


> Drinking bleach apparently


That's a cure of sorts


----------



## 74drew (Mar 10, 2020)

Wash Your Lyrics


----------



## Part-timah (Mar 11, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> This thread is for positive news, so fuck off with your doom & gloom.



It isnt positive if its obviously not helpful.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 11, 2020)

Does anyone know if any trials have been done with steroids?

From what I understand the severe symptoms are caused not directly by the virus itself but by the immune system sort of going out of control and causing inflammation in the lungs.

I don't know anything about pneumonia but I used to suffer with a lot of chest infections and now help my dad when he has them. The standard treatment weve both had is a combination of antibiotics and steroids (usually prednisolone). Part of what the steroids do is suppress the immune system to reduce inflammation and congestion while the antibiotics fight the infection.

So I'm just wondering if either they've tried anything with steroids or if theres some reason why they wont work (maybe because suppressing immune system has worse results than reducing the inflammation?)

Just wondering if anyone better informed than me knows?


----------



## elbows (Mar 11, 2020)

China tried corticosteroids on a bunch of early patients, with the usual results - they were shit, and the advice is not to use them.

I may have gone a little overboard with this answer, lack time to give a more nuanced one with appropriate links.


----------



## elbows (Mar 11, 2020)

Here is one source for that:



> Lack of effective antivirals, inadequate adherence to standard supportive therapy, and high-dose corticosteroid use might have also contributed to the poor clinical outcomes in some patients.





			https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30566-3/fulltext


----------



## two sheds (Mar 11, 2020)

elbows said:


> Here is one source for that:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Also interesting:



> 191 patients (135 from Jinyintan Hospital and 56 from Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital) were included in this study, of whom 137 were discharged and 54 died in hospital. 91 (48%) patients had a comorbidity, with hypertension being the most common (58 [30%] patients), followed by diabetes (36 [19%] patients) and coronary heart disease (15 [8%] patients).



Plus older age increases risk. I'd have expected greater incidence of asthma/COPD.


----------



## a_chap (Mar 12, 2020)




----------



## Fez909 (Mar 13, 2020)

We’ve Got The Vaccine, Says Pentagon-Funded Company
					

Canadian firm says it could make 10 million doses per month — if its innovative production method wins FDA approval.




					www.defenseone.com


----------



## editor (Mar 13, 2020)

I never want to see another of those fucking DIY lyrics hand washing graphics.


----------



## Marty1 (Mar 13, 2020)

Fez909 said:


> We’ve Got The Vaccine, Says Pentagon-Funded Company
> 
> 
> Canadian firm says it could make 10 million doses per month — if its innovative production method wins FDA approval.
> ...



The sooner the better (obvs).

Trump has also announced that he has cut as much red tape as possible to get a vaccine out at the earliest.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 13, 2020)

Chinese authorities are using a drug developed in Cuba called Interferon Alfa 2B,


----------



## kazza007 (Mar 13, 2020)

Currently anti HIV drugs are being used in extreme cases to  treat the body's immune response to  the virus.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 13, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Trump has also announced that he has cut as much red tape as possible to get a vaccine out at the earliest.



Testing medicines, particularly vaccines, properly is not 'red tape' it's vital for upholding the basic principle of medicine, 'first do no harm'.


----------



## Brainaddict (Mar 13, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> The sooner the better (obvs).
> 
> Trump has also announced that he has cut as much red tape as possible to get a vaccine out at the earliest.


If being an idiot were a crime you'd be in solitary confinement for life. I can't believe you're still here polluting the boards with your nonsense. Either you're a troll being deliberately stupid, or you have some psychological problem that forces you to stay around where you're not wanted. Either way, please fuck off the threads talking about serious topics, or for preference, fuck off altogether.


----------



## elbows (Mar 13, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> Testing medicines, particularly vaccines, properly is not 'red tape' it's vital for upholding the basic principle of medicine, 'first do no harm'.



And this might loom larger in the collective memory of older people in the USA because of the absolute disaster they had with the rushed 1976 vaccine for the 'flu pandemic that never was'.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 13, 2020)

Brainaddict said:


> If being an idiot were a crime you'd be in solitary confinement for life. I can't believe you're still here polluting the boards with your nonsense. Either you're a troll being deliberately stupid, or you have some psychological problem that forces you to stay around where you're not wanted. Either way, please fuck off the threads talking about serious topics, or for preference, fuck off altogether.


Earning his stripes for a far-right group is my increasingly firm hunch on this one.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 13, 2020)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Earning his stripes for a far-right group is my increasingly firm hunch on this one.



That's somehow comforting. Time was you'd maybe have to firebomb a lefty bookshop or a synagogue to get in with the cool nazis, now expectations have apparently sunk to being a minor annoyance on an internet forum for ageing lapsed anarchists.


----------



## Buddy Bradley (Mar 13, 2020)

editor said:


> I never want to see another of those fucking DIY lyrics hand washing graphics.


What about one for the "Om" song by Smeg and the Heads?


----------



## Cadmus (Mar 13, 2020)

Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread - Virology Journal
					

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is caused by a newly discovered coronavirus (SARS-CoV). No effective prophylactic or post-exposure therapy is currently available. Results We report, however, that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of primate cells...




					virologyj.biomedcentral.com


----------



## Barking_Mad (Mar 13, 2020)

Early days. Maybe there's a vaccine, maybe not. 



> Scientists in Israel are expected to announce in the coming days that they have completed development of a vaccine for the new coronavirus COVID-19, according to a media report here.
> 
> Quoting medical sources, Israeli daily Ha'aretz, reported on Thursday that scientists at the Israel's Institute for Biological Research, supervised by the Prime Minister's office, have recently had a significant breakthrough in understanding the biological mechanism and qualities of the virus, including better diagnostic capability, production of antibodies for those who already have the virus and development of a vaccine.
> 
> ...



"There has been no breakthrough in the efforts of the biological institute to find a vaccine for the coronavirus or to develop testing kits. The institute's work is conducted according to an orderly work plan and it will take time. If and when there will be something to report, it will be done in an orderly fashion", the Defence Ministry told Ha'aretz.









						Scientists in Israel likely to soon announce the development of coronavirus vaccine
					

Israeli daily Ha'aretz, quoting medical sources, reported on Thursday that scientists at the Israel's Institute for Biological Research, supervised by the Prime Minister's office, have recently had a significant breakthrough in understanding the biological mechanism and qualities of the virus.




					economictimes.indiatimes.com


----------



## LDC (Mar 13, 2020)

Shit post. Don't post nonsense like this, especially as a new thread with a title like you've given it.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 13, 2020)

There do seem to be some candidates for vaccines, I remember reading about a few for whom trails were starting. And there are a range of trials they have to go through. Part of the problem is the length of time it takes to get a drug through trials. That said I gather the last set of tests they go through are about things like side effects in humans, and depending on the severity of the virus at that stage it might be possible to start treating people before the final tests have been done. 

That said I think none of the options are less than many months away, perhaps as much as a year, assuming they don't fail at their earlier trials.


----------



## LDC (Mar 13, 2020)

Start thinking 18 months _at best_. And even then essential workers will be prioritized. It's not something to even_ start_ pinning any hope on now.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 13, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Start thinking 18 months _at best_. And even then essential workers will be prioritized. It's not something to even_ start_ pinning any hope on now.


Understood. 

What about the potential of the anti viral drugs that doctors have been mentioning which might assist as a treatment, do they have to go through the full set of 18 month delay and trials also?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 13, 2020)

A vaccine is likely to take 12-18 months before being wildly available.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 13, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Understood.
> 
> What about the potential of the anti viral drugs that doctors have been mentioning which might assist as a treatment, do they have to go through the full set of 18 month delay and trials also?



No, and there's a thread on that already.









						Possible vaccines/treatment(s) for Coronavirus
					

A thread for hopefully positive news on the fight back against this coronavirus.  I remember Chris Whitty, England's  Chief Medical Officer, mentioning some exiting antiviral drugs could be effective in treatment of this coronavirus, and there are three particular ones that could be good...




					www.urban75.net


----------



## weltweit (Mar 13, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> No, and there's a thread on that already.


So there is, and we both posted on it already, silly me.


----------



## Supine (Mar 13, 2020)

12-18 months is incredibly aggressive for a new vaccine to be approved for use. 

Add to that the fact that the UK leaves EMA on January 1st next year. This means a new product will almost certainly be available in Europe for months if not a year or more before the UK gets to approve it. 

Repurposing drugs already available is much quicker and manufacturing capacity is already available.


----------



## Badgers (Mar 14, 2020)

Research team has isolated the COVID-19 virus
					






					sunnybrook.ca


----------



## platinumsage (Mar 14, 2020)

The only named vaccine I know of that has entered Phase I trials is Moderna's mRNA-1273. 

China are reported to have some candidates ready for trials next month.

Regeneron are working on an antibody treatment they hope to start trialing in the summer. GSK have their COVID-19 S-Trimer and Inovia have INO-4800, both not targeting trials until the end of the year.

Drug-wise, Gilead have their SARS/MERS drug remdesivir in a phase III trial for SARS-CoV-2. Other off-label possibilities include the HIV lopinavir/ritonavir combo, the malaria drug chloroquine and the rheumatoid arthritis drug baricitinib


----------



## platinumsage (Mar 17, 2020)

On Remdesivir:

The paper described 12 patients with Covid-19, only three of whom were treated with remdesivir...analysts examined individual patient data and decided the Gilead drug showed mixed results, at best...“we believe remdesivir’s contribution to efficacy remains unclear, and with a side-effect profile that may not be completely benign...we continue to see a less than 50/50 possibility that the drug is ultimately proven effective.” New paper about a Gilead drug to combat coronavirus has analysts skittish


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 17, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> The sooner the better (obvs).
> 
> Trump has also announced that he has cut as much red tape as possible to get a vaccine out at the earliest.


If Trump gets his tiny mobster hands on the vaccine first we are all fucked.


----------



## two sheds (Mar 17, 2020)

Rutita1 said:


> If Trump gets his tiny mobster hands on the vaccine first we are all fucked.



Also pointed out above that 'cutting red tape' is likely to actually be 'not bothering with vaccine safety testing'.


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Mar 17, 2020)

No Cookies | Herald Sun
					

No Cookies




					www.heraldsun.com.au
				




Slightly sensationalist but more optimism about chloroquine and an HIV drug being tested calmly and rigorously on a large scale


----------



## pogofish (Mar 17, 2020)

Not a treatment/cure but maybe interesting from a control POV?



			https://www.karger.com/Article/FullText/89211
		




> *Abstract*
> The efficacy of several povidone-iodine (PVP-I) products, a number of other chemical agents and various physical conditions were evaluated for their ability to inactivate the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV). Treatment of SARS-CoV with PVP-I products for 2 min reduced the virus infectivity from 1.17 × 106 TCID50/ml to below the detectable level. The efficacy of 70% ethanol was equivalent to that of PVP-I products. Fixation of SARS-CoV-infected Vero E6 cells with a fixative including formalin, glutaraldehyde, methanol and acetone for 5 min or longer eliminated all infectivity. Heating the virus at 56°C for 60 min or longer reduced the infectivity of the virus from 2.6 × 107 to undetectable levels. Irradiation with ultraviolet light at 134 µW/cm2 for 15 min reduced the infectivity from 3.8 × 107 to 180 TCID50/ml; however, prolonged irradiation (60 min) failed to eliminate the remaining virus, leaving 18.8 TCID50/ml.
> 
> © 2006 S. Karger AG, Basel


----------



## Barking_Mad (Mar 17, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Start thinking 18 months _at best_. And even then essential workers will be prioritized. It's not something to even_ start_ pinning any hope on now.



I don't need your permission to start a thread on anything. There's no definitive promises here, just news on developments. Kindly take your aggressiveness elsewhere.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Mar 17, 2020)

Some other early promise. 

Link



> A team of Australian researchers say they've found a cure for the novel coronavirus and hope to have patients enrolled in a nationwide trial by the end of the month.
> 
> University of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research director Professor David Paterson told news.com.au today they have seen two drugs used to treat other conditions can wipe out the virus in test tubes.
> 
> ...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 17, 2020)

Barking_Mad said:


> I don't need your permission to start a thread on anything. There's no definitive promises here, just news on developments. Kindly take your aggressiveness elsewhere.



Why are you ignoring there's already a thread discussing these things?


----------



## editor (Mar 17, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> No, and there's a thread on that already.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'll merge


----------



## elbows (Mar 18, 2020)

UK trial of an inhalable drug:









						Experimental lung drug to be tested on UK coronavirus patients
					

Biotech firm Synairgen will trial SNG001 inhaler on 100 people in race to find cure




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## SheilaNaGig (Mar 19, 2020)

<deleted by request - ed>


----------



## two sheds (Mar 19, 2020)

Have we had this?









						Japanese flu drug 'clearly effective' in treating coronavirus, says China
					

Shares in Fujifilm Toyama Chemical, which developed favipiravir, surged after praise by Chinese official




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## SheilaNaGig (Mar 19, 2020)

This is good:


The Solidarity Trial is a global effort to find something that might work. People from countries all around the world are currently engaged in trying various things in the hope that shared information can led to a good outcome.









						UN health chief announces global ‘solidarity trial’ to jumpstart search for COVID-19 treatment
					

Just 60 days after the genetic sequence of COVID-19 was shared by China, the first vaccine trial has begun, the UN health chief said on Wednesday, calling it “an incredible achievement” and urging the world to maintain “the same spirit of solidarity” that has helped fight Ebola.




					news.un.org
				













						WHO to launch multinational trial to jumpstart search for coronavirus drugs
					

The WHO announced it would launch a multiarm, multicountry trial for potential #coronavirus therapies, part of an aggressive effort to jumpstart the search for drugs to treat #Covid19.




					www.statnews.com
				












						Global COVID-19 total tops 200,000; WHO unveils massive treatment study
					

The WHO announces a large international clinical trial to test 5 treatments.




					www.cidrap.umn.edu
				












						World Health Organization:COVID-19 vaccine trial begins
					

Trial to explore possible life-saving treatments, says global health body's head - Anadolu Agency




					www.aa.com.tr


----------



## Barking_Mad (Mar 21, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Why are you ignoring there's already a thread discussing these things?



Because I hadn't seen it. We all make mistakes. 

As you were, thanks Ed.


----------



## Indeliblelink (Mar 24, 2020)

Could the good old BCG jab help 
Can a century-old TB vaccine steel the immune system against the new coronavirus?


----------



## Ceej (Mar 24, 2020)

SheilaNaGig said:


> Okay.
> 
> So.
> 
> ...


Thank you -and I will be trying your suggestions for my cough.
In a way, we've been victims of our own invention, knowledge and creativity. There are so many wonderful, astonishing treatments for almost everything that ails you but so many are successfully hospital/technonology based that no other possibilities are now explored. This works perfectly when the system isn't overwhelmed by numbers. I wonder if we will now look to more natural, 'alternative' solutions in the future...


----------



## Supine (Mar 25, 2020)

From work:

With the novel coronavirus continuing to spread around the globe, drugmakers of all sizes are on the hunt for a possible therapeutic for the crisis. One option? Evaluating older meds to determine whether they can be repurposed as a possible treatment for COVID-19.

Pharma's strategy for developing a therapeutic is being fought on two fronts: Repurposing existing meds—be they antivirals or anti-inflammatories or another option altogether—and developing investigational candidates to target COVID-19, the condition caused by the novel coronavirus, directly.
So far, 14 repurposed drugs are in researchers' hands, according to the World Health Organization and drugmaker reports. 

Take chloroquine, for example: The long-generic malaria med has captured the nation's attention after President Donald J. Trump highlighted its use alongside antibiotic Z-Pack (azithromycin) as a possible treatment for COVID-19. Alongside a suite of antivirals, two meds in the IL-6 inhibitor class, Sanofi and Regeneron's Kevzara and Roche's Actemra, have also been submitted for clinical trials. 

So far, the results for those repurposed hopefuls have been mixed, at best.
Hydroxychloroquine, a more tolerable form of chloroquine, didn't top placebo at clearing the coronavirus among Chinese patients with mild cases, or at helping them reach normal temperature sooner, Evercore ISI analyst Umer Raffat noted in a Tuesday memo.
Separately, neither AbbVie's Kaletra, a combination of HIV antivirals lopinavir and ritonavir, nor Arbidol (umifenovir) delivered benefits in viral clearance or symptom relief compared with no antiviral treatment in a small Chinese study in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 patients, results published Monday on the preprint site medRxiv show.

With demand growing, though, drugmakers are stepping up to increase production. Earlier this week, Roche said it was "working urgently" to maximize production of Actemra to meet current demand while supplying clinical trials. The immunology med is in testing to treat the dangerous lung inflammation that hits patients with serious cases.

Meanwhile, AbbVie said it would waive patent rights for Kaletra to allow countries to buy cheaper generics of the drug and prevent a possible shortage. With no patent rights to enforce, AbbVie would likely forgo millions in profits if Kaletra is found effective to treat COVID-19.


----------



## Dogsauce (Mar 25, 2020)

Be wary of some stories of potential treatments/drugs, especially from unknown sources, as there will be twats out there posting false rumours so as to inflate the stocks of drug companies and cash in shares. It’s an old game that’s easily adapted for the current global crisis.


----------



## elbows (Mar 28, 2020)

elbows said:


> China tried corticosteroids on a bunch of early patients, with the usual results - they were shit, and the advice is not to use them.
> 
> I may have gone a little overboard with this answer, lack time to give a more nuanced one with appropriate links.



Something related popped up while I was reading NERVTAG meeting minutes today.

This is from their 30th January meeting:



> KR suggested that as an intensivist, outside of a clinical trial, he would only recommend the use of steroids in patients with novel coronavirus if there was another indication, such as septic shock or an exacerbation of COPD. *WS agreed  that  it  was  not  wise  to  use  steroids  in  a  viral  infection  if  there  was nothing  in  place  to  combat  the  virus  itself*.  PO would not recommend as routine but that steroids should be evaluated in the context of a clinical trial.



The various meetings minutes are from this website, and NERVTAG is the New & Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group.





__





						Box
					






					app.box.com


----------



## two sheds (Mar 28, 2020)

elbows said:


> China tried corticosteroids on a bunch of early patients, with the usual results - they were shit, and the advice is not to use them.
> 
> I may have gone a little overboard with this answer, lack time to give a more nuanced one with appropriate links.



That would be unfortunate since preventive asthma inhalers have corticosteroids mixed with bronchodilators.


----------



## elbows (Mar 28, 2020)

ECDC document has a brief mention of the same sort of thing too:



> Systemic use of steroids is not recommended because they might increase the viral replication and shedding of the virus along with other steroid-related side effects



(from page 8 of https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/de...-Outbreak-of-coronavirus-disease-COVID-19.pdf )

I cannot say anything about inhalers, I've only seen stuff relating to the use of steroids during critical care of severe cases.


----------



## Supine (Mar 31, 2020)




----------



## weltweit (Mar 31, 2020)

Supine interesting graphic. Do you know what the phases are that treatments / vaccines have to go through?


----------



## Supine (Mar 31, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Supine interesting graphic. Do you know what the phases are that treatments / vaccines have to go through?



roughly speaking its:

preclinical - safety / animal studies and other bits
phase 1 - healthy adults
phase 2 - small number patients
phase 3 - larger number of patients


----------



## Supine (Apr 4, 2020)

Work news 

Sanofi, the maker of a branded hydroxychloroquine drug called Plaquenil, is producing as much as it can to help healthcare systems fighting the pandemic, CEO Paul Hudson told Reuters. But amid the manufacturing push, some employees are having to step aside if they show symptoms.

The company decided to “overproduce” drugs but is operating just under max capacity, Hudson added. That’s because the company sends workers who show symptoms—plus those who have come into contact with them—home for two weeks.
“One person getting a temperature means we lose maybe a half dozen people,” Hudson told Reuters.

On hydroxychloroquine, the highly touted drug that's taken center stage for its potential to treat patients with COVID-19, Sanofi is making as much as it possibly can, Hudson told the news service. The company started boosting production in February on the heels of Chinese data.

Sanofi has gotten requests for the drug from countries around the globe, and it's working with other suppliers to ensure even distribution, he added. Sanofi has the capacity to make millions of doses, according to the report. 

As of Friday, global confirmed COVID-19 infections topped 1 million, and deaths passed 54,000

The pandemic has been playing out for months, and during that time, hydroxychloroquine—plus an older version, chloroquine—have garnered significant attention thanks to early anecdotal reports about their effects on COVID-19 patients and praise from President Donald Trump. The drugs have been approved for decades to treat malaria, lupus and arthritis.

Over the weekend, the FDA gave the drugs an emergency clearance, but European regulators this week decided against an approval until seeing more data. Some confusion and skepticism has stemmed from preliminary research in France, but the picture around the drugs in COVID-19 continues to evolve.  

This week, researchers in Wuhan, China, published results (PDF) from a controlled study in 62 patients. The entire group received standard care, while half of the group also received hydroxychloroquine for five days.  
In patients who received hydroxychloroquine, the time to clinical recovery and body temperature recovery were “significantly shortened," and those patients stopped coughing sooner, the authors said.  
Only four patients progressed to severe illness; all were in the control group. Two patients in the hydroxychloroquine group experienced mild adverse reactions. The authors wrote that the drug “could significantly shorten [time to clinical recovery] and promote the absorption of pneumonia” in patients with COVID-19. More research is needed, the authors say.  

“Considering that there is no better option at present, it is a promising practice to apply HCQ to COVID-19 under reasonable management,” the authors wrote. “However, large-scale clinical and basic research is still needed to clarify its specific mechanism and to continuously optimize the treatment plan.”  
The result will “send a ripple of excitement out through the treating community,” Vanderbilt University infectious disease expert William Schaffner told The New York Times. 

Demand for hydroxychloroquine has grown dramatically in recent weeks as a result of the attention. In a note Thursday, Bernstein analyst Ronny Gal wrote that the prescriptions for the drug had grown 500% in the last two weeks of March.

Drugmakers have been stepping up to provide supply. Novartis pledged a donation of up to 130 million global doses pending regulatory approvals. Mylan is ramping up production, and Teva and Amneal have each committed to making donations as well.


----------



## weltweit (Apr 5, 2020)

Nations with Mandatory TB Vaccines Show Fewer Coronavirus Deaths


> New study finds a correlation, but clinical trials are still in progress
> 
> The preliminary study posted on medRxiv, a site for unpublished medical research, finds a correlation between countries that require citizens to get the bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) vaccine and those showing fewer number of confirmed cases and deaths from Covid-19. Though only a correlation, clinicians in at least six countries are running trials that involve giving frontline health workers and elderly people the BCG vaccine to see whether it can indeed provide some level of protection against the new coronavirus.





> Gonzalo Otazu, assistant professor at the New York Institute of Technology and lead author of the study, started working on the analysis after noticing the low number of cases in Japan. The country had reported some of the earliest confirmed cases of coronavirus outside of China and it hadn’t instituted lockdown measures like so many other countries have done.


from 02/04/2020 Nations with Mandatory TB Vaccines Show Fewer Coronavirus Deaths

To add


> Among high-income countries showing large number of Covid-19 cases, the U.S. and Italy recommend BCG vaccines but only for people who might be at risk, whereas Germany, Spain, France and the U.K. used to have BCG vaccine policies but ended them years to decades ago. China, where the pandemic began, has a BCG vaccine policy but it wasn’t adhered to very well before 1976, Otazu said. Countries including Japan and South Korea, which have managed to control the disease, have universal BCG vaccine policies.



Early days, but interesting I hope.

Cross posted from the worldwide thread


----------



## weltweit (Apr 5, 2020)

> One of the oldest forms of immunotherapy is being pressed into action again. A study in _JAMA_ follows the transfer of serum from five donors who had recovered from the respiratory disease COVID-19 and had high titers of immunoglobulin G antibodies to the causative coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 to five patients on mechanical ventilation. Three of the five recipients were weaned from assisted ventilation and were subsequently discharged. The study has many limitations beyond the small number of patients, including the lack of a placebo group and the diverse set of treatments, including antivirals, that each patient was receiving.


from 03/04/2020 COVID-19 Research in Brief: 28 March to 3 April, 2020

cross posted from worldwide thread


----------



## elbows (Apr 5, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Early days, but interesting I hope.



Its interesting but from what we've seen so far I'm not sure I expect the effect to be that strong. Because the UK still gave these vaccines routinely till 2005, and France gave them until 2007.


----------



## weltweit (Apr 5, 2020)

elbows said:


> Its interesting but from what we've seen so far I'm not sure I expect the effect to be that strong. Because the UK still gave these vaccines routinely till 2005, and France gave them until 2007.


Yes, I was wondering about that, most people in my age group had the BCG


----------



## weltweit (Apr 5, 2020)

When will a coronavirus vaccine be ready?


> Human trials will begin imminently – but even if they go well and a cure is found, there are many barriers before global immunisation is feasible


from 19 March 2020. When will a coronavirus vaccine be ready?

cross posted from worldwide thread


----------



## weltweit (Apr 7, 2020)

Three interesting articles from the Lancet 

Preventing COVID-19-induced pneumonia with anticytokine therapy


> Morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19 are highest in the elderly and among people with comorbidities. Individuals with comorbidities could theoretically include patients with immune-mediated disorders taking cytokine blockers, as these drugs inhibit the function of molecules involved in the host defence against pathogens. Surprisingly, however, no increase of SARS-CoV-2-driven pneumonia has been documented in such patients so far. Therefore, the question arises as to whether patients with immune-mediated disorders on cytokine inhibitors represent a privileged group who are resistant to COVID-19 disease. Analysis of the cytokine profile characterising severe cases of COVID-19 suggests this assumption might be the case.


from 06/04/2020 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanrhe/article/PIIS2665-9913(20)30092-8/fulltext

Intensive care management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): challenges and recommendations


> As coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spreads across the world, the intensive care unit (ICU) community must prepare for the challenges associated with this pandemic. Streamlining of workflows for rapid diagnosis and isolation, clinical management, and infection prevention will matter not only to patients with COVID-19, but also to health-care workers and other patients who are at risk from nosocomial transmission.


from 06/04/2020 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30161-2/fulltext

Understanding pathways to death in patients with COVID-19


> Since the first cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), were identified in China in December, 2019, we have witnessed increasing numbers of infections and associated deaths worldwide. Although the case fatality rate for SARS-CoV-2 infection (ie, the total number of deaths in patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 divided by the total number of people with a positive test) is not high, given the huge scale of the pandemic, the actual numbers of deaths are considerable.


from 06/04/2020 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30165-X/fulltext


----------



## ice-is-forming (Apr 13, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Three interesting articles from the Lancet
> 
> Preventing COVID-19-induced pneumonia with anticytokine therapy
> 
> ...



Ive been reading a lot about this, purely for selfish reasons as my youngest son is on   a cytokine inhibitor for RA and AS.

It would seem that although he may be at increased risk of catching covid-19, he may have less chance of it killing him.

He's using IL7 , and there's not much information because it's a trial at present ( for his condition not C19) but I get how it could stop the pneumonia, by stopping an immune response.


----------



## weltweit (Apr 14, 2020)

This isn't a treatment but I thought it belonged in this thread better than others.

Consumer tech converted to rapidly test for Covid-19


> A consumer DNA testing device dubbed DnaNudge has been modified to provide a rapid, lab-free PCR (polymerase chain reaction) test that detects COVID-19 and delivers results in just over an hour.
> ..
> Experts at Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust are working with the Imperial College London and DnaNudge team to enable the new test to be applied to patients and staff if it continues to prove successful.





> According to Imperial College a key advantage of DnaNudge’s solution is that the RNA polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test requires no sample handling and is able to deliver processing outside of a laboratory environment – using DnaNudge’s patented and miniaturised NudgeBox analyser.


from 14/04/2020 Consumer tech converted to rapidly test for Covid-19 | The Engineer


----------



## two sheds (Apr 14, 2020)

This sounds promising, too: 









						Emergency room doctor, near death with coronavirus, saved after experimental treatment
					

A Seattle emergency-room doctor contracted COVID-19 while treating patients infected by coronavirus. He owes his life to physicians who used an experimental treatment.




					www.latimes.com
				






> The immune system normally uses proteins called cytokines as weapons in fighting a disease. For unknown reasons in some COVID-19 patients, the immune system first fails to respond quickly enough and then floods the body with cytokines, destroying blood vessels and filling the lungs with fluid.
> 
> The doctors tried a drug called Actemra, which was designed to treat rheumatoid arthritis but also approved in 2017 to treat cytokine storms in cancer patients.
> 
> ...



Mind you they've also said that viagra is a possible treatment


----------



## Supine (Apr 20, 2020)

Possible mechanisms for a vivid treatment



			https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/367/6485/1412/F1.large.jpg


----------



## Supine (Apr 30, 2020)

Some more detail on remdesivir status

After dribs and drabs surfacing about Gilead Sciences' COVID-19 hopeful, remdesivir, the first data from a placebo-controlled study are here—at least, an early look at them. Remdesivir cut recovery time for hospitalized COVID-19 patients by four days, or 31%, in a National Institutes of Health-sponsored study pitting the drug against placebo in more than 1,000 patients.

Based on the results, the FDA could greenlight remdesivir for emergency use as early as Wednesday, a senior administration official said, according to The New York Times.
“Although a 31% improvement does not seem like a knockout 100%, it is a very important proof of concept because what it has proven is that a drug can block this virus,” Anthony Fauci, M.D., director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), said during a White House briefing with reporters Wednesday.

The study, carried out at 68 sites around the world, defined “recovery” as being healthy enough to leave the hospital or return to normal activity level. The trial wasn’t reserved for the sickest of patients—unlike other trials that only included patients with “severe” disease—but the patients still had to be hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 infection along with “evidence of lung involvement,” like the need for supplemental oxygen or mechanical ventilation. The study did not include patients with milder, coldlike symptoms or those who were asymptomatic.

The results also “suggested a survival benefit,” with a death rate of 8% in patients who received remdesivir and 11% in those who got placebo, NIAID said in a statement. The numbers were too close to be statistically significant, Fauci said, but the data need to be further analyzed and undergo peer review. Gilead is also testing remdesivir in moderately ill patients.

Multiple analysts, meanwhile, used the same metaphor Wednesday to describe the limitations of remdesivir. “The bottom line is the drug improves patients and clearly appears to help,” wrote Jefferies analyst Michael Yee in an investor note. “It’s not a magic silver bullet but it does improve patients and likely will get broader uptake.”
Evercore ISI analyst Umer Raffat considered the data alongside results from other studies, including a Gilead-sponsored trial testing a five-day course and a 10-day course of remdesivir—with no control arm—as well as a study conducted in China.

“Totality of data… suggests remdesivir ‘works’, but it’s not a silver bullet,” Raffat wrote. But Fauci doesn’t see remdesivir, an experimental antiviral initially developed for Ebola, as a silver bullet. Rather, he sees it as a steppingstone to better treatments that could even be combined for a greater effect.


----------



## Supine (May 1, 2020)

Possibly the most random covid development of the week...

When llamas encounter pathogens like viruses and bacteria, their immune systems fight them off with two weapons: antibodies much like those made by the human body and much smaller antibodies called single-domain antibodies or “nanobodies.” Now, those nanobodies have inspired a potential treatment for COVID-19 that may be able to be delivered straight to the lungs, where the virus tends to set up shop.

Scientists from the University of Texas (UT) at Austin, the National Institutes of Health and Ghent University in Belgium developed a treatment that links two nanobodies isolated from a llama to create an antibody that binds to the spike protein on the coronavirus that causes COVID-19. That bond prevented the virus from invading cells, the researchers reported (PDF) in the journal Cell.
The researchers actually started working on the treatment in 2016, when they were studying two related coronaviruses, SARS-CoV-1 and MERS-CoV. They injected a llama named Winter with spike proteins from the viruses. Six weeks later, they collected her blood and isolated antibodies that had bound to the protein.

After SARS-CoV-2 emerged, sparking the COVID-19 pandemic, the scientists built on their earlier experiment, linking two copies of the llama nanobody that had worked against SARS-CoV-1. Now that they’ve shown the engineered antibody can neutralize the new virus in cell cultures, they’re planning preclinical studies in rodents and nonhuman primates.

Llamas and other members of the camelid family have long been of interest to medical researchers because of the single-domain antibodies they produce. In 2018, for example, a scientific team including Scripps Research Institute and Janssen scientists described an experimental flu vaccine they developed by immunizing llamas against the flu and then isolating broadly neutralizing single-domain antibodies (sdAbs) from them. Because the sdAbs target a region of the virus that doesn’t mutate, the researchers believe a llama-inspired vaccine could offer more universal protection than standard seasonal flu vaccines do.

Camelids have also inspired experimental treatments for cancer and multiple sclerosis that capitalize on the tendency of the antibodies to bind more tightly to therapeutic targets than human-inspired antibodies can.
Another advantage of llama nanobodies is their size, said Daniel Wrapp, a graduate student at UT Austin and co-author of the new paper. They’re about a quarter of the size of human antibodies—small enough to be nebulized and delivered straight to the lungs via an inhaler. "That makes them potentially really interesting as a drug for a respiratory pathogen because you're delivering it right to the site of infection," Wrapp said in a statement.


----------



## bellaozzydog (May 2, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Three interesting articles from the Lancet
> 
> Preventing COVID-19-induced pneumonia with anticytokine therapy
> 
> ...



blimey. I’m on golumimab (well was until my last injection which was in February)

very interesting reading


----------



## Supine (May 4, 2020)

Remdesevir is getting a lot of press recently but there is a whole host of existing medicines being clinically trialled.

As April waned, *Amgen* announced it would take PDE4-inhibitor *Otezla, *which it picked up from Celgene last year, into a clinical trial soon to study its effectiveness in preventing respiratory distress from COVID-19.

Meanwhile, *Novartis* plans to evaluate IL-1beta blocker *Ilaris* to treat cytokine storm, a severe overimmune reaction that can be fatal. Investigators will primarily focus on whether Ilaris can keep patients off ventilators. Top-line results are expected late summer.

Novartis is also evaluating IL-17A inhibitor *Cosentyx*, leukemia drug *Gleevec*, old heart drug *Diovan*(valsartan) and asthma therapy *Xolair *for their effects on COVID-19. 

Meanwhile, the Swiss drugmaker and its partner *Incyte* have commenced a study for JAK inhibitor *Jakafi* to treat cytokine storm. The blinded, double-arm study will test Jakafi alongside standard-of-care therapy in COVID-19 patients with pneumonia.

*Eli Lilly *took rheumatoid arthritis med *Olumiant* into clinical trials as well, announcing in mid-April it would launch a U.S. trial immediately and later expand testing to Europe and Asia. The project started in February when Benevolent AI identified the Lilly drug as a possible treatment, not only for its anti-inflammatory effects, but also potential antiviral activity. 

AstraZeneca rolled out a test of blood cancer med *Calquence* in mid-April, after NIH researchers observed “some clinical benefit” in COVID-19. But most recently, AZ said it would launch a trial for diabetes superstar *Farxiga*. The Dare-19 trial will study Farxiga alongside supportive care, focusing on its potential for reducing the progression of COVID-19 symptoms and cutting the risk of clinical complications and death.

After initially planning to evaluate blockbuster *Soliris*' effect on COVID-19, *Alexion* pivoted last month and said it would put follow-up drug *Ultomiris* into a phase 3 clinical trial instead. Alexion cited preclinical data showing the drug's mechanism could lower cytokine and chemokine levels, plus reduce lung inflammation. 

Finally, a suite of IL-6 inhibitors have been pitted against COVID-19, including Sanofi and Regeneron's *Kevzara*, Roche's *Actemra* and EUSA Pharma's *Sylvant*.

And some early results are in: In late April, *Sanofi and Regeneron* cut severely ill patients from the phase 3 U.S. trial of Kevzara after a precursor study showed negligible results in treating those patients requiring oxygen therapy, but not more intensive treatment. It'll focus on critically ill patients instead.

*Roche*'s Actemra, meanwhile, posted an early trial win late last month in a small-scale French study, showing it could help combat cytokine storm in severe and critically ill COVID-19 patients with pneumonia. 

A number of big-time generics players––including *Bayer, Mylan *and Novartis––have donated millions of doses of antimalarial hydroxychloroquine to hospitals and clinical trials despite some iffy evidence on its use to treat COVID-19. A favorite of President Donald J. Trump, hydroxychloroquine recently flopped a VA study in late April and has been treated with caution by global health authorities.


----------



## Supine (May 8, 2020)

Gilead Sciences has captured worldwide attention since its antiviral drug remdesivir was approved late last week as the first therapy to treat COVID-19. Now, as bad actors target companies at the head of the spear in the novel coronavirus response, Gilead might have found itself in their sights.

Gilead was recently hit with an Iranian "password spraying" attack that used fake email login pages in an attempt to access passwords of high-ranking executives, Reuters reported. 

In April, an Iranian hacker group known as "Charming Kitten" sent an email, purportedly from a journalist, to a Gilead legal and corporate affairs executive as part of a scheme to compromise the drugmaker's company email accounts, three cybersecurity experts told Reuters. 

Iran's mission to the United Nations denied the country's involvement in the scheme. Reuters wasn't able to confirm whether the attack was successful. 

Earlier this week, the U.K. and U.S. governments warned that "malicious cyber campaigns" were targeting healthcare policymakers and researchers to gain access to corporate emails using "password spraying," or using common passwords to access a number of accounts. 

Gilead has been the focus of intense international scrutiny since its remdesivir won emergency clearance from the FDA last week. The drug is the only new therapy so far authorized to treat COVID-19.

The company has said it would donate its entire existing supply, or about 1.5 million doses, to the U.S. government for distribution. The Trump administration has shipped about 32,000 doses to Indiana, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Tennessee and Virginia, Axios reports.

With the emergency approval, Gilead has worked to increase its own supply of the medicine and is in licensing talks with some of the “world’s leading chemical and pharmaceutical manufacturing companies” about their ability to produce remdesivir for countries in Europe, Asia and beyond until at least 2022.

The company is discussing licensing the med to generics makers in India and Pakistan to supply patients in developing countries. It's also considering licensing the drug to the Medicines Patent Pool and exploring using UNICEF’s expertise for distribution in low- and middle-income countries.


----------



## Supine (May 18, 2020)

Not great news from the Oxford vaccine trials. It ain't over yet but the results could have been better. 









						Did The Oxford Covid Vaccine Work In Monkeys? Not Really
					

The latest data on the vaccine being developed out of Oxford shows limited success.




					www.forbes.com


----------



## Supine (May 19, 2020)

Moderna post.positive first results for their vaccine






						Moderna Announces Positive Interim Phase 1 Data for its mRNA Vaccine (mRNA-1273) Against Novel Coronavirus | Moderna, Inc.
					

After two doses all participants evaluated to date across the 25 µg and 100 µg dose cohorts seroconverted with binding antibody levels at or above levels seen in convalescent sera mRNA-1273 elicited neutralizing antibody titer levels in all eight initial participants across the 25 µg and 100 µg




					investors.modernatx.com


----------



## Supine (May 28, 2020)

So Remdesivir initial results showed some promise but it obviously isn’t the final answer as a covid medicine.

Roche are now initiating phase 3 clinical trials for a combination product containing Remdesivir and a drug called Actemra which acts against cytokine storms. It’ll be interesting to see how this goes with severe covid patients.





__





						Roche initiates phase III clinical trial of Actemra/RoActemra plus remdesivir in hospitalised patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia
					






					www.roche.com


----------



## Badgers (Jun 2, 2020)

How is the vaccine going then? The government spokescunts seems pretty bullish about it. 

The track and trace seems to be slow off the mark and the app is a month away so the vaccine would be something to cheer the mood


----------



## Supine (Jun 2, 2020)

The CEO of Novartis is estimating 18 months and I'd imagine he knows what he's talking about. Some info here:









						Novartis CEO explains why the wait for a coronavirus vaccine is so long
					

Vas Narasimhan discusses the coronavirus, vaccines, public health, and more on the latest episode of Leadership Next.




					fortune.com


----------



## Supine (Jun 4, 2020)

Latest vaccine news. Long read...

British drugmaker AstraZeneca has made clear its intent to rapidly scale production of Oxford University's COVID-19 vaccine hopeful despite a dearth of clinical data to support its use. Now, with an eye-popping deal worth three-quarters of a billion dollars, AstraZeneca is putting its money where its mouth is.

The British pharma has inked a $750 million deal with the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance to manufacture and distribute 300 million doses of Oxford's adenovirus-based COVID-19 vaccine by the end of 2020, the drugmaker said Thursday.
AZ also agreed to a licensing deal with the Serum Institute of India to provide 1 billion doses of the vaccine to low- and middle-income countries, with the goal of 400 million produced by year's end.

In total, the deals will bring AstraZeneca's overall supply capacity for Oxford's vaccine candidate to more than 2 billion doses per year, the drugmaker said. The agreement will task CEPI with manufacturing the vaccine, while Gavi will handle procurement.

The marketing effort will be overseen by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's and World Health Organization's Access to COVID-19 Tools Accelerator, which will "ensure the fair allocation and distribution of the vaccine across the world," according to a release.

AstraZeneca's enormous manufacturing and distribution layout represents the single largest effort so far to pump hundreds of millions of doses of a COVID-19 vaccine hopeful onto the market before the end of 2020.

AstraZeneca reached an agreement with Oxford in April to manufacture and commercialize hundreds of millions of doses of its COVID-19 vaccine as health regulators around the world scrambled to meet what will likely be global demand.

The vaccine, dubbed AZD1222, contains the genetic material of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. It isn’t replicating, so it can’t cause an ongoing infection in recipients, AZ says. The company hopes the vaccine can deliver a strong immune response from one dose by triggering the body to produce the spike protein and attack the novel coronavirus upon infection.

In late May, AstraZeneca scored a $1.2 billion contribution from the U.S. for development, production and delivery of its potential shot starting this fall. The company has signed up to deliver 400 million doses through its initial supply agreements, including a 300-million-dose work order for the U.S. and 100 million doses for the U.K.

In a more minor move last week, AstraZeneca and Oxford BioMedica inked a one-year deal covering "multiple batches" of the vaccine.
As part of the agreement, AstraZeneca will have access to Oxford BioMedica's 84,000-square-foot OxBox commercial manufacturing center in Oxford, England. The agreement will turn out most of the clinical and commercial supply in 2020 with the possibility of expansion in the future, Oxford BioMedica said in a release.

AstraZeneca's massive supply commitments will depend on results from an ongoing phase 2/3 trial of the vaccine that hopes to enroll 10,260 people in the U.K. The study aims to generate results to support the first shipments to customers in September. A 1,000-patient phase 1 trial hasn't yet turned out top-line data.

The phase 2 test will relax exclusion criteria used in phase 1, notably by enrolling a small number of children ages 5 to 12 and adults age 56 and older. One cohort will enroll adults over 70, a demographic that is particularly at risk from the coronavirus. By expanding the age range, the researchers aim to understand how immune response varies across demographic groups.

Once the vaccine moves into phase 3, the researchers will limit enrollment to people age 18 and older. Adult participants in the phase 2 and 3 trials will be randomized to receive one or two doses of AZD1222 or a vaccine against meningococcal bacteria that will serve as the control.


----------



## Supine (Jun 10, 2020)

First results from the large UK 'Recovery' trial have been published. It's a big no to hydroxychloroquine as a covid treatment.





__





						Results — RECOVERY Trial
					






					www.recoverytrial.net


----------



## William of Walworth (Jun 10, 2020)

I'm getting the general impression that some sort of effective _treatment_ of Covid-19 is much more of an optimistic prospect (and could possibly become available a fair bit sooner) than an effective _vaccine_ any time soon.

Do the more science-together people agree?

Cheers


----------



## Supine (Jun 11, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> I'm getting the general impression that some sort of effective _treatment_ of Covid-19 is much more of an optimistic prospect (and could possibly become available a fair bit sooner) than an effective _vaccine_ any time soon.
> 
> Do the more science-together people agree?
> 
> Cheers



I don't think so personally. A cocktail of the current candidate drugs may well help significantly but I think it'll take years to find a 'proper' treatment drug.

The current drugs are all repurposed products. This means a lot of the groundwork with respect to drug development and safety has already been done. A proper targeted drug will  need to be designed and developed from scratch and that will take longer than the current virus development programmes.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jun 11, 2020)

Supine said:


> I don't think so personally. A cocktail of the current candidate drugs may well help significantly but I think it'll take years to find a 'proper' treatment drug.
> 
> The current drugs are all repurposed products. This means a lot of the groundwork with respect to drug development and safety has already been done. A proper targeted drug will  need to be designed and developed from scratch and that will take longer than the current virus development programmes.



Thanks -- I was not doubt being too unrealistic 

I will take away the words 'may well help significantly' from your post though </crosses fingers  >


----------



## platinumsage (Jun 16, 2020)




----------



## LDC (Jun 16, 2020)

platinumsage said:


>




If people want to have a look at what it's used for now....





__





						Dexamethasone | Drugs | BNF content published by NICE
					

View dexamethasone information, including dose, uses, side-effects, renal impairment, pregnancy, breast feeding, contra-indications and monitoring requirements.




					bnf.nice.org.uk


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 16, 2020)

I was just about to post about that, as it's been on the BBC TV news.









						Coronavirus: Dexamethasone proves first life-saving drug
					

Patients should be given the cheap drug without delay, after "fantastic" trial results, experts say.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2020)

It certainly seems like some positive news and we could really do with some.

I don't think I'll be getting my hopes up too much yet as there is a long way to go and the numbers are good but not brilliant


----------



## sojourner (Jun 16, 2020)

So the really deadly part of the virus is the body's inflammatory response. Do we know yet if people who usually suffer from inflammatory responses/conditions (insect bites, eczema, asthma, arthritis, gum disease) are more likely to be badly affected?   Does it work like that?


----------



## LDC (Jun 16, 2020)

sojourner said:


> So the really deadly part of the virus is the body's inflammatory response. Do we know yet if people who usually suffer from inflammatory responses/conditions (insect bites, eczema, asthma, arthritis, gum disease) are more likely to be badly affected?   Does it work like that?



Inflammatory response not one thing though, much more complex than that. Suspect the answer is we don't know yet.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2020)

Well, they seem to be getting quite excited about Dexamethasone in today's briefing.  I suppose when you scale the numbers up that's a lot of lives saved, potentially.

Given its a cheap drug as well the potential for use around the world is huge albeit it in a hospital setting.


----------



## Supine (Jun 16, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> Given its a cheap drug as well the potential for use around the world is huge albeit it in a hospital setting.



It was only found to help people on ventilators or oxygen. It didn't have a significant effect on less poorly people so hospital settings is where it'll be used.


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 16, 2020)

I don't wish to appear cynical here but surely the fact that there is some positive news to announce and BoZo decided to do todays briefing himself is pure co-incidence.


----------



## Supine (Jun 16, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> I don't wish to appear cynical here but surely the fact that there is some positive news to announce and BoZo decided to do todays briefing himself is pure co-incidence.



Absolutely no coincidence i'd imagine


----------



## weltweit (Jun 16, 2020)

Good news about dexamethasone.  

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-53059487 "the drug dexamethasone which could save the life of one in eight patients who experience serious breathing problems is widely available and cheap."


----------



## Supine (Jun 16, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Good news about dexamethasone.
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-53059487 "the drug dexamethasone which could save the life of one in eight patients who experience serious breathing problems is widely available and cheap."



Do you read this thread?


----------



## weltweit (Jun 16, 2020)

Supine said:


> Do you read this thread?


Yes, I did read the thread  but I had just constructed a large post about dexamethasone and remdesivir and in the end decided to abandon it but I couldn't bring myself to delete all of it so I left in the bit about 1 in 8 ..


----------



## rutabowa (Jun 16, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> If people want to have a look at what it's used for now....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Oh I used to have those eye drops.


----------



## LDC (Jun 16, 2020)

The trial has been going on for ages, and finished recently with results announced.





__





						Low-cost dexamethasone reduces death by up to one third in hospitalised patients with severe respiratory complications of COVID-19 — RECOVERY Trial
					

Statement from the Chief Investigators of the Randomised Evaluation of COVid-19 thERapY (RECOVERY) Trial on dexamethasone, 16 June 2020




					www.recoverytrial.net


----------



## weltweit (Jun 16, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper can we take it Convalescent plasma didn't have a positive effect, or does the trial continue?


----------



## LDC (Jun 16, 2020)

weltweit said:


> LynnDoyleCooper can we take it Convalescent plasma didn't have a positive effect, or does the trial continue?



No idea, I'll have a look about.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 16, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> No idea, I'll have a look about.


No don't worry I might check it out tomorrow. 
The plasma trial was in the same UK NHS trial as the dexamethasone.


----------



## Supine (Jun 16, 2020)

weltweit said:


> No don't worry I might check it out tomorrow.
> The plasma trial was in the same UK NHS trial as the dexamethasone.



Still ongoing as far as I know. They seem to be releasing results super early so I guess we'll find out as soon as they have enough patients processed.


----------



## LDC (Jun 17, 2020)

weltweit said:


> LynnDoyleCooper can we take it Convalescent plasma didn't have a positive effect, or does the trial continue?



Trial ongoing weltweit









						Research and trials
					

NHS Blood and Transplant is involved in a number of COVID-19 research programmes, including clinical trials investigating whether plasma transfusions could improve a COVID-19 patient’s recovery.



					www.nhsbt.nhs.uk
				




E2A: Ah, already posted and seen.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 4, 2020)

The Houston Memorial Medical Centre seems to think they have found the answer, having a 100% success rate over 3 months, recently dropped to 96%, which is still bloody impressive.  Worth reading the full article. 



> Dr Varon admits he's "thrown the kitchen sink" at trying to find new ways of beating this virus.
> 
> And now he thinks there's a game-changer.
> 
> ...











						Coronavirus: Houston doctor says 'we're heading to pure hell' as COVID-19 cases spike in Texas
					

A doctor tells Sky News they are receiving many more sick patients and are bracing themselves for a "tsunami" of infections.




					news.sky.com


----------



## prunus (Jul 4, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> The Houston Memorial Medical Centre seems to think they have found the answer, having a 100% success rate over 3 months, recently dropped to 96%, which is still bloody impressive.  Worth reading the full article.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This has been around for a while now, maybe 6 weeks? Anyone who wants the details: https://www.evms.edu/media/evms_pub...cine/EVMS_Critical_Care_COVID-19_Protocol.pdf - including what they I emphasise speculate is a prophylactic dosage of mostly vitamins and zinc.

They’re using a different anti inflammatory steroid to the one the Recover study recently showed to have dramatic effect, possibly incorporating or swapping in this might be even more efficacious - I speculate this time.   (Edit to add: though then they’d have to rename it Dath+ for dexamethazone instead of methylprednisolone, or, if they used the first 2 letters of dexamethazone instead of just the D, then..)


----------



## Badgers (Jul 16, 2020)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 20, 2020)

Here's a possible treatment for those admitted to hospital, although it's early days, the double-blind trial only involved 101 patients, and the research hasn't been peer-reviewed yet, but it sounds promising.



> The preliminary results of a clinical trial suggest a new treatment for Covid-19 dramatically reduces the number of patients needing intensive care, according to the UK company that developed it.
> 
> The treatment from Southampton-based biotech Synairgen uses a protein called interferon beta which the body produces when it gets a viral infection.
> 
> ...





> Patients were two to three times more likely to recover to the point where everyday activities were not compromised by their illness, Synairgen claims.
> 
> It said the trial also indicated "very significant" reductions in breathlessness among patients who received the treatment.
> 
> In addition, the average time patients spent in hospital is said to have been reduced by a third, for those receiving the new drug - down from an average of nine days to six days.











						Coronavirus: Protein treatment trial 'a breakthrough'
					

Synairgen says preliminary results suggest its nebuliser treatment can lower the risk of disease.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## LDC (Jul 20, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Here's a possible treatment for those admitted to hospital, although it's early days, the double-blind trial only involved 101 patients, and the research hasn't been peer-reviewed yet, but it sounds promising.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Discussed on Radio 4 this morning, and there was an interview with the head of the program. Inhaled version which is new, but the drug itself used in different formulations for MS already.


----------



## two sheds (Jul 20, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Here's a possible treatment for those admitted to hospital, although it's early days, the double-blind trial only involved 101 patients, and the research hasn't been peer-reviewed yet, but it sounds promising.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Interesting, I wonder whether it might help treat flu and viral pneumonia too.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 20, 2020)

Coronavirus: Oxford vaccine triggers immune response
					

Study shows the vaccine is safe, but it is still too soon to know if it can stop people from being infected.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				





So, so much want this thing to work. Worried the UK government has ordered 100m doses of it, kind of signals it won't work. But really want it to with every fibre of my being...


----------



## Teaboy (Jul 20, 2020)

I wonder why 100 million?

I also wonder how long Oxford Uni will want their name attached to it?  Its all good publicity now but at some point they'll need to give it a medical name especially when they find out that in 1% it causes a tail to grow from your forehead.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 20, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> I wonder why 100 million?
> 
> I also wonder how long Oxford Uni will want their name attached to it?  Its all good publicity now but at some point they'll need to give it a medical name especially when they find out that in 1% it causes a tail to grow from your forehead.



AstraZeneca will be producing it, so I assume they are responsible for it thereafter, it's already known as AZD1222.


----------



## clicker (Jul 20, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> I wonder why 100 million?
> 
> I also wonder how long Oxford Uni will want their name attached to it?  Its all good publicity now but at some point they'll need to give it a medical name especially when they find out that in 1% it causes a tail to grow from your forehead.


Maybe if it doesn't give long term immunity, which they won't know yet, it could be we have a yearly vaccine (like a flu jab scenario). So makes sense to stock up . However if the govt have actually managed to order something that works and arrives is another thing.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 20, 2020)

BTW, they have not just ordered 100 million doses of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine, but also 60 m from a French company & another 30 m from a German company, they are hedging bets on three different vaccines, so far.


----------



## prunus (Jul 20, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> I wonder why 100 million?
> 
> I also wonder how long Oxford Uni will want their name attached to it?  Its all good publicity now but at some point they'll need to give it a medical name especially when they find out that in 1% it causes a tail to grow from your forehead.



Instant mental image when reading that is Calvin* saying “cool!”

* Of Calvin and Hobbes**, not the other Calvin.
** Not that Hobbes, the other one.


----------



## Cloo (Jul 20, 2020)

Yes, I do dread the thought of this shitshow government actually trying to organise delivery of a vaccine if it happens.

The Synairgen thing sounds like perhaps the more plausible chance of a solution, but I don't know what availability of active ingredients is like - if COVID can be reduced to being no more, or not much more, dangerous than other things that do the rounds this winter, there's some hope there


----------



## William of Walworth (Jul 20, 2020)

I'm doing my very best not to become either *over*-optimistic, or _prematurely_ optimistic, about these recent posts ...... 

But kinnell!! I really hope, for everyone, that at least one of these trials that are coming into the human testing stage, works out!!!!!

 or  or  or  ??

(  )


----------



## Cloo (Jul 20, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> I'm doing my very best not to become either *over*-optimistic, or _prematurely_ optimistic, about these recent posts ......
> 
> But kinnell!! I really hope, for everyone, that at least one of these trials that are coming into the human testing stage, works out!!!!!
> 
> ...


Apparently synairgen have put things in chain a few months back to produce enough of the stuff they need to deliver a lot over winter if it works - the good thing is I understand the interferon is used in other treatments historically which means they should have some assurance of safety.


----------



## Big Bertha (Jul 21, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> BTW, they have not just ordered 100 million doses of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine, but also 60 m from a French company & another 30 m from a German company, they are hedging bets on three different vaccines, so far.


They are doing stuff that actually sounds competent!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 21, 2020)

Big Bertha said:


> They are doing stuff that actually sounds competent!



Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jul 21, 2020)

Big Bertha said:


> They are doing stuff that actually sounds competent!



Don't worry, Chris Grayling will be head of whichever department is responsible by the end of the week.


----------



## Callie (Jul 21, 2020)

I'm off to Tooting South Lahndahn to the big NHS blood service centre soon to see if they want my blood to make covid antibody filled plasma to give to people. That's quite exciting!


----------



## Dogsauce (Jul 22, 2020)

Badgers said:


>




How about we don’t get to live in a world where vital stuff like this is kept secret?  This stuff should be shared freely, the fact it requires espionage to develop life-saving medicines should reflect poorly on our society, not Putins lot.


----------



## LDC (Jul 22, 2020)

Dogsauce said:


> How about we don’t get to live in a world where vital stuff like this is kept secret?  This stuff should be shared freely, the fact it requires espionage to develop life-saving medicines should reflect poorly on our society, not Putins lot.



Of course it reflects badly on 'Putin's lot', it compromises the integrity of the research, might invalidate data, patient records exposed, might mean it's been tampered with, all sorts of reasons. No fucking excuse for hacking vaccine research.

Complain when companies make profit from the end result, but keeping data secure until then is necessary for safety and security at the very least.


----------



## Teaboy (Jul 22, 2020)

Agree that this should be a global effort with the world all pulling together.  We don't live in that world though so of course its shit what "Putin's lot" are up to if true.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 11, 2020)

A big issue as there'll be a lot of rushed vaccines coming... There's precedent for dodgey side effects with rushed vaccines.

Russia reckons they're ready to start producing... After 2 months of trials.
I would not be keen to take it

I've read elsewhere an Oxford scientist saying there's only a one in three chance a vaccine can be found. Will be interesting to hear scientific reaction to the Russian vaccine


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 11, 2020)

I'm not normally one for doing this but there is a thread going on this: Possible treatment(s) for Coronavirus.

In general though I really hope the Russian vaccine is a goer.  I really hope it saves lives and can be rolled out globally especially to low income countries.  I am however very cautious because it does seemed to have turned around in a double quick time.  I am also concerned that national pride and politics are playing a large role in this and that is very concerning from a healthcare perspective.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 11, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> I'm not normally one for doing this but there is a thread going on this: Possible treatment(s) for Coronavirus.
> 
> In general though I really hope the Russian vaccine is a goer.  I really hope it saves lives and can be rolled out globally especially to low income countries.  I am however very cautious because it does seemed to have turned around in a double quick time.  I am also concerned that national pride and politics are playing a large role in this and that is very concerning from a healthcare perspective.


Missed that thread, yeah bin this.


----------



## editor (Aug 11, 2020)

*merge


----------



## NoXion (Aug 11, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> I'm not normally one for doing this but there is a thread going on this: Possible treatment(s) for Coronavirus.
> 
> In general though I really hope the Russian vaccine is a goer.  I really hope it saves lives and can be rolled out globally especially to low income countries.  I am however very cautious because it does seemed to have turned around in a double quick time.  I am also concerned that national pride and politics are playing a large role in this and that is very concerning from a healthcare perspective.



I honestly don't understand this desire to fucking _rush_ shit. Sure, you'll get accolades if you create a successful vaccine before anyone else, but the chances of that happening is nowhere near a nailed-on certainty. It could well be the case that the rushed vaccine ends up being a complete disaster that does more harm than good. That would be a black mark against the reputation of your country, the reputation of your country's biomedical scientists and institutions, and in the end you could well be in a worse position than before.

It's so fucking _childish_. Fucking do it properly or don't bother. It will be better in the long run. For fuck's sake.


----------



## Supine (Aug 11, 2020)

Phase 3 is the stage that most vaccines fail due to safety, side effects or failed response. Skipping this step seems incredibly dangerous to me. Probably plays well to a domestic audience who don't know the details of the development.


----------



## two sheds (Aug 11, 2020)

Is that where they slip the ID chip in there? 




sorry wrong thread


----------



## Wilf (Aug 11, 2020)

A point I've seen made in the reporting of the Russia vaccine is that it not only has dangers of directly harming people, it also boosts the arguments of conspiraloons (if it does have serious side effects).


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 11, 2020)

I mean I hope it works as I've got mates out there but I'm not confident tbh.


----------



## two sheds (Aug 12, 2020)

Putin having his daughter inoculated has clearly taken lessons in PR from John Gummer


----------



## 8ball (Aug 12, 2020)

Supine said:


> Phase 3 is the stage that most vaccines fail due to safety, side effects or failed response. Skipping this step seems incredibly dangerous to me. Probably plays well to a domestic audience who don't know the details of the development.



Phase 3 failures are also at least partly down to refined assessments of the cost:benefit of the drug (usually there will be plenty of drugs already in the field, which is not the case here).

I don’t know the ins and outs of this particular case, but they will have decent initial safety data, and the downside of a lack of effectiveness won’t be anything that puts us further back than where we already are (usually you are testing on people _with_ the disease, which means a greater harm is done if you give a duff drug when a reasonable one is available).

I expect the grandstanding element also plays into it though tbf.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 12, 2020)

Wilf said:


> A point I've seen made in the reporting of the Russia vaccine is that it not only has dangers of directly harming people, it also boosts the arguments of conspiraloons (if it does have serious side effects).



That's my biggest fear, the last thing the world needs is a dodgy vaccine that ends up adding fuel to the anti-vaxxer movement.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 12, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> That's my biggest fear, the last thing the world needs is a dodgy vaccine that ends up adding fuel to the anti-vaxxer movement.



Aye.  As far as I can see they've not published any data from the trials which is unhelpful to say the least.  It makes me more than a little concerned regarding the future and how or if information on its efficacy and any side effects is published and reliable.  

Putin has said that its "quite effective" which is hardly a ringing endorsement but you have to allow for translation.  Also his daughter has already been given the vaccine.  If we take that at face value I would guess (and it is a total guess) that the vaccine will likely be safe enough just not very effective.

As I said up page I hope I'm wrong and I hope its both safe and effective.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 12, 2020)

Apparently more than 30,000 would-be volunteers in 140 countries have said they are prepared to take part in challenge studies, where they would be infected with SARS-CoV-2 to test vaccines. 



> Scientists working on Britain's best hope for a coronavirus vaccine are understood to be at odds about whether to deliberately infect healthy patients in order to test it.
> 
> Professor Adrian Hill, the director of the Jenner Institute at Oxford University, wants to recruit young volunteers for such tests in the hope that it will speed up the race for a successful jab.
> 
> ...











						Scientists in spat over whether to infect people in coronavirus vaccine trials
					

Researchers advocate use of human guinea pigs, which would see healthy people deliberately infected in order to test jab




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 12, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Apparently more than 30,000 would-be volunteers in 140 countries have said they are prepared to take part in challenge studies, where they would be infected with SARS-CoV-2 to test vaccines.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Risky.  Its really frontier science this and not like the good old days where they'd just trial it on soldiers or a random town without telling them.


----------



## William of Walworth (Aug 12, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> That's my biggest fear, the last thing the world needs is *a dodgy vaccine that ends up adding fuel to the anti-vaxxer movement*.



A really good quality and reliable vaccine would have an identical effect on those twazzocks


----------



## William of Walworth (Aug 12, 2020)

ska invita said:


> A big issue as there'll be a lot of rushed vaccines coming... There's precedent for dodgey side effects with rushed vaccines.
> 
> Russia reckons they're ready to start producing... After 2 months of trials.
> I would not be keen to take it
> ...



Is there any chance that  you (or someone) could link to source with a statement by that Oxford scientist, please? 

I'd like to know the thinking.

Having been following some of the articles about vaccines, my (non-scientist's  ) reaction is that there's so much varied and well funded (and in several countries, very meticulous and cautious) research going on, that it seems surely *more* likely that a successful one _will_ emerge, eventually.

Maybe a one in three chance out of three different research programmes?


----------



## William of Walworth (Aug 12, 2020)

I should add though that I share everyone's scepticism about efficacy of this Russian 'vaccine' .... 

Plus that I keep instructing myself (very strictly) to _avoid_ over-optimism about vaccines more generally.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 12, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> Is there any chance that  you (or someone) could link to source with a statement by that Oxford scientist, please?
> 
> I'd like to know the thinking.



Load of bollocks.  Like there's any way of really assessing the probability.


----------



## William of Walworth (Aug 13, 2020)

Good, well-explained article about premature approval of under-tested vaccines here, includes interesting quotes from experts  :




			
				Guardian headline said:
			
		

> *'They've jumped the gun' : scientists worry about Russia's Covid-19 vaccine *
> *Rising chorus of concern over Sputnik V vaccine stems from opaque development and lack of mass testing*






			
				Article said:
			
		

> ADE [antibody-dependent enhancement  -- of the actual disease] “is a genuine concern”, Kevin Gilligan, a virologist and senior consultant with Biologics Consulting, told Nature Biotechnology in June. “Because if the gun is jumped and a vaccine is widely distributed that is disease-enhancing, that would be worse than actually not doing any vaccination at all.”



Not all of the [Guardian] article is as negative though -- it's worth a full read IMO  -- not all that long.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 27, 2020)

Citriodiol-based spray can help protect against Covid-19, says MoD lab
					

DSTL reports ‘some loss of virus’ using bug repellent, but unclear how much difference it makes




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## William of Walworth (Aug 27, 2020)

From that Guardian article (short, and mildly interesting only  ) it says that the  Defence Science and Technology Lab (DSTL) study [aka Porton Down!] has not been peer reviewed, and that its lead researcher wants 'others' to take it forward.

So very limited stuff -- not worthy of the Daily Sensation's headline above it, I'd say.


----------



## William of Walworth (Aug 27, 2020)

More interesting (IMO) is this from the Guardian about the Oxford vaccine trials.




			
				Guardian headline said:
			
		

> * Covid-19: ‘possible’ Oxford vaccine data will be put before regulators this year*
> 
> *Director of group says Chris Whitty right to be cautious but hopes vaccine will be ready before winter 2021*



I would especially read the bit from Prof Pollard commenting on Whitty's opinion about timing.




			
				Guardian said:
			
		

> Prof Andrew Pollard, the director of the Oxford Vaccine Group, said it is “just possible” that there may be enough clinical trial data on Oxford University’s Covid-19 vaccine to put before the regulators this year.
> Prof Chris Whitty, England’s chief medical officer, has said a vaccine may not be ready until next winter. Pollard suggested they were hoping to go faster.
> “I think that Chris Whitty is quite rightly being cautious, that it could take as long as that to first of all demonstrate a vaccine works and is safe and then to go through the processes of regulators looking at that very carefully to make sure everything’s been done correctly,” Pollard told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.
> “But it is also just possible [my emphasis- WoW] that, if the cases accrue rapidly in the clinical trials, that we could have that data to put before regulators this year, and then there would be a process that they go through in order to make a full assessment of the data.”
> That could still mean the vaccine would not be approved this year



Still, 'not until Winter 2021' does to me sound on the _very_ cautious side .... maybe?? 

(Apologies if this has been posted about already, somewhere else)


----------



## zora (Aug 31, 2020)

Just had a listen to the latest episode of the German podcast I follow, which had as its theme a discussion about how to get through winter without lockdown. 

I was surprised but heartened to hear how much stock a couple of the experts put in the availability of high quality antigen tests in the near future (in the next couple of months or so). 

Pcr testing is beginning to creak at the seams now at around a million tests processed per week, with delays in test results increasing. There is also concern about availability of the necessary raw materials over the coming months.
Some people are calling for more and more testing ("all pupils", "all teachers" etc), but the capacity isn't there and apparently batch testing isn't as straightforward  as lay people might think. 

But the panel did seem to think that antigen tests might be able to fill this gap (the "pregnancy test"-type that people can perform at home if I understand correctly). A study is currently being conducted among teachers with weekly testing with one such antigen test. 

Whilst they are not as sensitive as the pcr test, they might be sensitive enough to detect the virus when it matters most, when viral load and therefore infectiousness are at its highest. Also, the broader availability would make up for this from an epidemiological point of view.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 1, 2020)

A SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidate would likely match all currently circulating variants
					

The rapid spread of the virus causing COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, raises questions about the possibility of a universally effective vaccine. The virus can mutate in a given individual, and these variants can be propagated across populations and time. To understand this process, we analyze 18,514...




					www.pnas.org
				




An old uni friend has been working on this paper. This is really good news as a vaccine will probably be effective against all SARS-COV-2 mutations.


----------



## gosub (Sep 1, 2020)

A Supercomputer Analyzed Covid-19 — and an Interesting New Theory Has Emerged
					

A closer look at the Bradykinin hypothesis




					elemental.medium.com


----------



## elbows (Sep 2, 2020)

Theres been another study into corticosteroids and their impact. They reckon 8 lives would be saved for every 100 patients treated.









						Coronavirus: Cheap steroids save lives from severe Covid
					

Eight lives would be saved for every 100 critically ill patients given steroids.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




I'm pretty sure I would have moaned once or twice on here early on about corticosteroid use, mostly because its the sort of thing that is reached for and relied on too much without suitable evidence. And some of the early evidence suggested it was making things worse rather than better. I am very pleased that subsequent evidence has shown these sorts of drugs actually having a use and reducing the deaths a bit.


----------



## elbows (Sep 2, 2020)

It felt good to be wrong about that in this pandemic, I really want to be wrong more in future in this pandemic!


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 4, 2020)

Promising news from Russia's sputnik vaccine.  https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31866-3/fulltext

With all the usual caveats about the size of study etc.  Still, it shows promise in that produces antibodies and didn't appear to do much harm.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 4, 2020)

Shit I hope so, I've got mates there some of whom would be vulnerable.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 9, 2020)

Astrazeneca vaccine trial halted / paused after participant contracts mystery illness. 









						Brazil governor says coronavirus vaccine trials promising: Live
					

Governor of Sao Paulo state says clinical trials of Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine has shown promising results.




					www.aljazeera.com
				











						AstraZeneca pauses COVID-19 vaccine trial over possible adverse reaction in participant
					

"This is a routine action which has to happen whenever there is a potentially unexplained illness in one of the trials," an AstraZeneca spokesperson said.




					www.cbsnews.com


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 9, 2020)

Sounds like 1 patient and a routine investigation.  Very normal according to my friends who do this stuff for a living.  Its how trials are supposed to proceed.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 13, 2020)

Trials of the Oxford vaccine are resuming.

Let's hope there's no other people becoming ill, and ideally this case is not actually caused by the vaccine, otherwise the anti-vaxxers will go to town on it. 



> "This pause shows we will always put safety first. We will back our scientists to deliver an effective vaccine as soon as safely possible," he added. The university said in a statement that it was "expected" that "some participants will become unwell" in large trials such as this one.
> 
> It added that the studies could now resume following the recommendations of an independent safety review committee and the UK regulator, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency.
> 
> It would not disclose information about the patient's illness for confidentiality reasons, but the New York Times reported that a volunteer in the UK trial had been diagnosed with transverse myelitis, an inflammatory syndrome that affects the spinal cord and can be caused by viral infections.











						Coronavirus: Oxford University to resume vaccine trial after pause
					

The late-stage trials were paused due to a reported side effect in a patient in the UK.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 13, 2020)

Now this is an interesting read.



> It comes as increasing evidence suggests that the amount of virus someone is exposed to at the start of infection - the “infectious dose” - may determine the severity of their illness. Indeed, a large study published in the Lancet last month found that “viral load at diagnosis” was an “independent predictor of mortality” in hospital patients.
> 
> Wearing masks could therefore reduce the infectious dose that the wearer is exposed to and, subsequently, the impact of the disease, as masks filter out some virus-containing droplets.
> 
> If this theory bears out, researchers argue, then population-wide mask wearing might ensure that a higher proportion of Covid-19 infections are asymptomatic.



Does seem to make sense, and although not totally proven, there does seem to be some evidence suggesting it is the case. 



> While this hypothesis needs to be backed up with more clinical study, experiments in hamsters have hinted at a connection between dose and disease. Earlier this year, a team of researchers in China found that hamsters housed behind a barrier made of surgical masks were less likely to get infected by the coronavirus. And those who did contract the virus became less sick than other animals without masks to protect them.
> 
> Some observations found in humans seem to support this as well. In a coronavirus outbreak on a closed Argentinian cruise ship, for example, where passengers were provided with surgical masks and staff with N95 masks, the rate of asymptomatic infection was 81 per cent. This is compared with 20 per cent in earlier cruise ship outbreaks without universal masking.




I would recommend reading the full article. 









						Face masks could be giving people Covid-19 immunity, researchers suggest
					

Mask wearing might also be reducing the severity of the virus and ensuring that a greater proportion of new infections are asymptomatic




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## Badgers (Sep 15, 2020)

Can't vouch for the link but still  









						Coronavirus vaccine won’t be available to everyone before 2024 end: India's Serum Institute chief
					

In a big blow to the expectations regarding the covid-19 vaccine, the Serum Institute of India has said adequate coronavirus vaccine will not be available for everybody in the world to be immunised until the end of 2024.  The chief executive of the world’s largest manufacturer of vaccines, Adar...




					www.wionews.com


----------



## two sheds (Sep 15, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Now this is an interesting read.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


low-level doses of the virus as possible vaccine?


----------



## Supine (Sep 15, 2020)

two sheds said:


> low-level doses of the virus as possible vaccine?



The 'are you feeling lucky' technique


----------



## Badgers (Sep 15, 2020)

Supine said:


> The 'are you feeling lucky' technique


Turd Immunity?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 15, 2020)

Another possible treatment drug is going to trial.



> The Oxford-based Recovery trial which proved that steroids saved the lives of some Covid patients will now take on a promising but far more expensive new antibody combination treatment, it has been announced.
> 
> A cohort of patients joining the trial in most NHS acute hospitals will be randomly allocated to Regeneron’s experimental drug, called REGN-COV2. The drug is a combination of two human neutralising antibodies against the virus. The company previously developed a similar antibody drug against Ebola.
> 
> Unlike dexamethasone, which Recovery proved saves the lives of one in eight acutely ill patients, this is a drug that has been invented for the pandemic. It has successfully come through animal studies and a phase one safety trial and is now in late stage trials in the United States.











						New antibody drug joins Oxford University trial of Coronavirus treatments
					

Regeneron’s experimental drug REGN-COV2 to be added to UK’s Recovery trial




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Yu_Gi_Oh (Sep 15, 2020)

Looks like we might be getting a vaccine pretty fucking soon.  If it's rolled out for teachers in the first phase, I will take it.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 15, 2020)

Yu_Gi_Oh said:


> Looks like we might be getting a vaccine pretty fucking soon.  If it's rolled out for teachers in the first phase, I will take it.



Sounds promising.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 15, 2020)

Yu_Gi_Oh said:


> Looks like we might be getting a vaccine pretty fucking soon.  If it's rolled out for teachers in the first phase, I will take it.


If that works, it would be quite amusing if Trump had to get on his hands and knees and beg China for the vaccine.


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 18, 2020)

Yu_Gi_Oh said:


> Looks like we might be getting a vaccine pretty fucking soon.  If it's rolled out for teachers in the first phase, I will take it.




*All caveats allowed for*, that does sound like *there's some real possible POTENTIAL for good vaccine new**s* before long.


My own personal vaccine against becoming overoptimistic, makes me apply emphasis to the bolded bits above


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 27, 2020)

Laura Spinney, author of the definitive book about the 'Spanish Flu' pandemic in 2018/2019, continues to be great!!  




			
				Laura Spinney said:
			
		

> *How the race for a Covid-19 vaccine is getting dirty *






			
				Laura Spinney said:
			
		

> *Scientists worldwide are working against the clock to find a viable coronavirus vaccine – but are corners being cut for the sake of political gain and profit?*


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 27, 2020)

Here's a non-vaccine-focussed piece from her that's about further recent covid research ...


* Genetic or immune defects may impair ability to fight Covid-19 *

*Exclusive : significant proportion of severely ill people have inborn errors, study finds*


----------



## Wilf (Oct 8, 2020)

Bit of noise about getting approval by the end of the year for the Oxford vaccine, some of which are random media reports that have more sober assessment when you get past the headlines.  For those in the know, does this suggest they are actually seeing interim results showing it does protect the test subjects?  I do know how double blind tests work, was just wondering if there's been anything suggesting the thing does actually deliver?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 8, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Bit of noise about getting approval by the end of the year for the Oxford vaccine, some of which are random media reports that have more sober assessment when you get past the headlines.  For those in the know, does this suggest they are actually seeing interim results showing it does protect the test subjects?  I do know how double blind tests work, was just wondering if there's been anything suggesting the thing does actually deliver?


well, this doesn't help:




__





						Coronavirus vaccine blow as Oxford trial faces another delay to investigate side effects
					





					www.msn.com


----------



## Supine (Oct 8, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Bit of noise about getting approval by the end of the year for the Oxford vaccine, some of which are random media reports that have more sober assessment when you get past the headlines.  For those in the know, does this suggest they are actually seeing interim results showing it does protect the test subjects?  I do know how double blind tests work, was just wondering if there's been anything suggesting the thing does actually deliver?



Don't know about that. Last I saw was this which was published today. 



> As more than a half-dozen pharma companies race to develop vaccines to fight COVID-19, AstraZeneca has stood out for its pledge that it won’t try to profit off its shot until after the pandemic ends.
> 
> Now, the company may be walking back that vow a bit.
> 
> ...


----------



## elbows (Oct 11, 2020)

Indeliblelink said:


> Could the good old BCG jab help
> Can a century-old TB vaccine steel the immune system against the new coronavirus?



Back in the news:









						BCG: Can a vaccine from 1921 save lives from Covid-19?
					

Vaccines may cause wide-scale changes in the immune system which can boost the body's protection.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## elbows (Oct 11, 2020)

From the above:



> Around 1,000 people will take part in the trial at the University of Exeter.
> But while millions of people in the UK will have had the BCG jab as a child, it is thought they would need to be vaccinated again to benefit.





> The UK trial is part of the international Brace-study, which is also taking place in Australia, the Netherlands, Spain and Brazil, recruiting 10,000 people in total.
> It will focus on health and care workers, as they are more likely to be exposed to coronavirus, so researchers will know more quickly if the vaccine is effective.


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 14, 2020)

From elbows ' post above :




			
				Exeter University said:
			
		

> But while millions of people in the UK will have had the BCG jab as a child, *it is thought they would need to be vaccinated again to benefit. *



And *IF* it works, the problem with that would be _precisely zero_ surely?


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 14, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> From elbows ' post above :
> 
> 
> 
> And *IF* it works, the problem with that would be _precisely zero_ surely?



Well it would mean you'd need a massive roll out programme and you'd need to assess if the degree of benefit was worth it, rather than people already having that protection.

It's not an anti-vax point.


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 14, 2020)

Very fair point, and it's good that you prompt me to think about that cheers  

I do still struggle though, with assessing whether the degree of benefit would be "worth it"  -- surely, if people might? already be protected/immune, then even so, a new 'vaccine-guarentee' (?) would scarcely do any harm, surely?

Less risky than doing without I'd have thought ...

<needing properly science-minded people to comment on this to clarify ... cheers anyone!  >


----------



## xenon (Oct 14, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> Very fair point, and it's good that you prompt me to think about that cheers
> 
> I do still struggle though, with assessing whether the degree of benefit would be "worth it"  -- surely, if people might? already be protected/immune, then even so, a new 'vaccine-guarentee' (?) would scarcely do any harm, surely?
> 
> ...



Well not that I'm a proper science bod but a few thoughts.

If the study confirms there is some protective benefit from the BBCG jab providing an overall boost to the immune system, you have to then look at how much of a boost. Would rolling out a mass re-immunisation program be worthwhile if say the bennfit is only marginal. Not because you or I as individuals may think it's worth it and be up for it but a mass program could divert resources from other efforts. Financial, time, manpower and material resources that might be best deployed in other measures or at least kept in reserve should an actual vaccine become viable in the next year or 2.


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 14, 2020)

xenon : Will need to think about that a bit more, and without the 'aid' of beer  

For now, here's something else from today -- that pissed me off a bit.

The Daily Mail (Weds 14th October) splashed with (to no-one's surprise obvs) a sensational headline that said




			
				Mail Page One headline said:
			
		

> *No hope of normality until JULY : Head of Oxford vaccine team warns facemasks and social distancing will be needed until next summer *
> 
> *Andrew Pollard warned measures would continue even if his trial is successful *
> *First jabs could not be available until next year and then only for key groups *
> *Professor Pollard said: 'Life won't be back to normal until summer at the earliest' *




I'm not linking to those Mail cunts , but I did skim the story  in Sainsbury's this afternoon, and needless to say the headline is far more worst-case-scenario than most of the content .....

Spot the _actual connection_ between facemasks/distancing and actual prospects and timing of a vaccine?  ...
Not suggesting that we won't be facemasking and distancing for a good long time (and no problem there for me) but azwe-all-gnome, there's a difference between correlation and causation 

ETA : *'Next year'* isn't synonymous with *JULY!!!1!!1!!* either ......


----------



## xenon (Oct 14, 2020)

Well it sounds reasonable TBH, that measures such as social distancing and facemasks may need to be in place until next summer. In fact, I'm just trying to accept that will be the case. 

A bonus would be if some music / theatre venues can open in some capacity.


----------



## Supine (Oct 21, 2020)

I hear the person who died in the astrazenica vaccine trial had been in the placebo arm of the experiment. Good news (not for them obviously). Not seen it in the press yet.


----------



## LDC (Oct 21, 2020)

Supine said:


> I hear the person who died in the astrazenica vaccine trial had been in the placebo arm of the experiment. Good news (not for them obviously). Not seen it in the press yet.



I'm having the Novavax vaccine/placebo jab this week, so I'm pleased to hear that!


----------



## teuchter (Oct 21, 2020)

Interesting that they had to pause the trial even though the patient concerned hadn't been given the vaccine.


----------



## xenon (Oct 21, 2020)

teuchter said:


> Interesting that they had to pause the trial even though the patient concerned hadn't been given the vaccine.



Maybe it's a double blind trial, so may have taken some time to work out who had what whilst the people on the ground paused things.

Never mind of course it would look a bit crass to just keep going, telling the relatives, Sorry about that but they were only on the placebo anyway.


----------



## Supine (Oct 21, 2020)

teuchter said:


> Interesting that they had to pause the trial even though the patient concerned hadn't been given the vaccine.



They wouldn't know until the investigation was completed.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 21, 2020)

Supine said:


> They wouldn't know until the investigation was completed.


Is it something that's very complicated to check?


----------



## two sheds (Oct 21, 2020)

Are we sure it was one of the people having the placebo? 

placebos can be powerful though


----------



## Supine (Oct 21, 2020)

teuchter said:


> Is it something that's very complicated to check?



It's made very difficult. It wouldn't be blind otherwise.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 21, 2020)

Supine said:


> I hear the person who died in the astrazenica vaccine trial had been in the placebo arm of the experiment. Good news (not for them obviously). Not seen it in the press yet.





> *Trials of a Covid-19 vaccine being developed by AstraZeneca and Oxford University will continue, following a review into the death of a volunteer in Brazil.*
> Brazil's health authority has given no details about the death, citing confidentiality protocols.
> Oxford University said a "careful assessment" had revealed no safety concerns.
> The BBC understands that the volunteer did not receive the vaccine.











						Covid: No safety concerns found with Oxford vaccine trial after Brazil death
					

The Brazilian volunteer did not receive the vaccine being tested by AstraZeneca and Oxford University.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Supine (Oct 21, 2020)

You heard it here first!


----------



## teuchter (Oct 21, 2020)

Supine said:


> It's made very difficult. It wouldn't be blind otherwise.


Sure... I'm just interested in what it actually involves. I can see that there'd probably be some system that would rely on multiple people giving consent to the access of information but I'm wondering why it would take a long time once it's agreed that it needs to be checked.


----------



## Cloo (Oct 25, 2020)

I do think we should expect social distancing, as they said earlier this year, to last into late next year sad to say William of Walworth  - OTOH I guess people will now be busy organising more outdoor safely distanced stuff for next summer, though I think we'd be bloody lucky to get two such dry spring/summers in a row  

I see promising progress from Oxford: Oxford coronavirus vaccine ‘works as expected' and triggers 'strong immunity’ - but all the same, even if we get a functional vaccine, I wonder what the minimum is that would be needed to move towards normality?  As in, would over 70s, NHS and care staff as a bare minimum be enough to ease off some things? Given deaths and hospitalisation pretty rare under that age group, but that still could mean high levels of absence from jobs/secondary schools/college/uni of the unvaccinated.


----------



## nogojones (Oct 25, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> I'm having the Novavax vaccine/placebo jab this week, so I'm pleased to hear that!


I hope they don't give you the placebo. It sounds dangerous.


----------



## LDC (Oct 25, 2020)

nogojones said:


> I hope they don't give you the placebo. It sounds dangerous.



Placebo is saline.


----------



## nogojones (Oct 25, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Placebo is saline.


These so called scientists with their funny chemicals


----------



## prunus (Oct 25, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Placebo is saline.



You do realise that ‘saline’ is an anagram of ‘aliens’...


----------



## Wilf (Oct 26, 2020)

The mighty hancock has been talking about there being an outside chance of the Oxford/Zeneca vaccine starting to be deployed by the end of the year, reporting that he's 'in contact with them' (sorry lost the link, it was some newsfeed or other). Regardless that it's the halfwit hancock coming out with this, is that code for Oxford now having some sense that the differences between control and vaccine groups are significant enough to be putting in for regulatory approval within the month?

By the way, I do know how double blind tests work, I've just assumed with something so big/important/expensive that they will already have some interim data on effectiveness.


----------



## LDC (Oct 26, 2020)

We submit data as we go along starting day after the trial vaccination and that's collected instantly by Novavax (done on a smartphone app) so I think a picture of its effectiveness might start to emerge before the official end of the trial.


----------



## Supine (Oct 26, 2020)

I think the trial opens when X participants catch covid. The quicker that number is reached the quicker we know if it works.

When x patients are sick they look to see how many are from the placebo arm of the trial. Hopefully most of them will be.

The one advantage of increasing rates is quicker results.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 26, 2020)

Wilf said:


> The mighty hancock has been talking about there being an outside chance of the Oxford/Zeneca vaccine starting to be deployed by the end of the year, reporting that he's 'in contact with them' (sorry lost the link, it was some newsfeed or other). Regardless that it's the halfwit hancock coming out with this, is that code for Oxford now having some sense that the differences between control and vaccine groups are significant enough to be putting in for regulatory approval within the month?
> 
> By the way, I do know how double blind tests work, I've just assumed with something so big/important/expensive that they will already have some interim data on effectiveness.


See post no. 200 above.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 26, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> We submit data as we go along starting day after the trial vaccination and that's collected instantly by Novavax (done on a smartphone app) so I think a picture of its effectiveness might start to emerge before the official end of the trial.


Cheers.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 26, 2020)

Supine said:


> I think the trial opens when X participants catch covid. The quicker that number is reached the quicker we know if it works.
> 
> When x patients are sick they look to see how many are from the placebo arm of the trial. Hopefully most of them will be.
> 
> The one advantage of increasing rates is quicker results.


Yeah, I get that, but given the stakes on this I doubt that it's going to be entirely a case of waiting till that threshold is met and then a thumbs up or down.  For one thing there will be regular chatter between the team and Hancock's civil servants.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 26, 2020)

teuchter said:


> See post no. 200 above.


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.


----------



## Supine (Oct 26, 2020)

Nice tracker for vaccine development





__





						Vaccines – COVID19 Vaccine Tracker
					






					covid19.trackvaccines.org


----------



## LDC (Oct 26, 2020)

Supine said:


> Nice tracker for vaccine development
> 
> 
> 
> ...



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!


----------



## existentialist (Oct 26, 2020)

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.


I'm more inclined to view it as a political hope, TBH...


----------



## Wilf (Oct 26, 2020)

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!


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.


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 26, 2020)

Repetition-attack here , 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.





Wilf said:


> TBH, I'd settle for that.






			
				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  ) 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.
> ...



Want thoughts please!!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 27, 2020)

> @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  ) 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.



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.


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 27, 2020)

Cheers, thought-provoking figures!

I will get back to this, but I'm off back at work this morning very soon -- no time!


----------



## LDC (Oct 27, 2020)

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.



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.


----------



## LDC (Oct 27, 2020)

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.


----------



## Supine (Oct 27, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> 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.



We'd better get Grayling on the case.


----------



## Epona (Oct 27, 2020)

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.



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.


----------



## LDC (Oct 27, 2020)

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.



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.


----------



## two sheds (Oct 27, 2020)

As the nurse once asked me: "how are you with chickens and eggs?"


----------



## Supine (Oct 27, 2020)

After the vaccine starts rolling out the question becomes how long it takes to see large scale impact on covid's ability to infect people and the severity when it does.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 27, 2020)

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.


----------



## Epona (Oct 27, 2020)

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.



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.


----------



## two sheds (Oct 27, 2020)

indeed - working towards an _actual _herd immunity.


----------



## Epona (Oct 27, 2020)

two sheds said:


> indeed - working towards an _actual _herd immunity.



Yeah based on vaccination rather than letting everyone catch it and see what happens


----------



## teuchter (Oct 27, 2020)

Supine said:


> Nice tracker for vaccine development
> 
> 
> 
> ...



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.


----------



## Epona (Oct 27, 2020)

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.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 27, 2020)

Epona said:


> In terms of how to convince people who are anti-vaccine?  I am not sure how,



Some of them, you just can't.

They have a kind of immunity to evidence.


----------



## Supine (Oct 27, 2020)

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.



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 (Oct 27, 2020)

Supine said:


> 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.


The experts we've had enough of.


----------



## Epona (Oct 27, 2020)

teuchter said:


> Some of them, you just can't.
> 
> They have a kind of immunity to evidence.



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.


----------



## elbows (Oct 27, 2020)

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.



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.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 27, 2020)

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.



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.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 27, 2020)

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.



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.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 27, 2020)

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.



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.


----------



## two sheds (Oct 27, 2020)

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.


----------



## elbows (Oct 27, 2020)

two sheds said:


> 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.



I think its probably too complicated for a generalised answer to be useful. And even with influenza vaccines there are lots of variables, it isnt just about poor strain match. For example the H3N2 component of the vaccine was performing extremely poorly in older people for quite a long time now, and they were prepared to draw more attention to this publicly only once a different (adjuvanted) vaccine was made available in the UK for the older age group.

eg:



> There is increasing evidence of the poor performance of non-adjuvanted, standard influenza vaccines in older people. A meta-analysis of data between 2004 and 2015 did not show any significant efficacy for the inactivated influenza vaccine in the elderly against the A(H3N2) influenza virus (Bellongia et al., 2016).



From https://www.england.nhs.uk/south/wp...dvice-gps-cgs-influenza-accination-adults.pdf


----------



## two sheds (Oct 27, 2020)

interesting, ta


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 27, 2020)

*All* of this recent discussion has been *very* interesting, and I've learned _a lot_ from these insights 

But still no time for me to join in properly, for now 

Moor later, etc.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 28, 2020)

This is worth reading in full. 



> The chair of the UK Vaccine Taskforce has said the first generation of COVID-19 vaccines "is likely to be imperfect" and that they "might not work for everyone".
> 
> Writing in *The Lancet*, Kate Bingham said no vaccine in the history of medicine "has been as eagerly anticipated" and that "vaccination is widely regarded as the only true exit strategy from the pandemic that is currently spreading globally".
> 
> ...











						Coronavirus vaccine taskforce chair says first COVID vaccines 'likely to be imperfect' and 'might not prevent infection'
					

The warning comes as a review calls for a global standard to properly assess the effectiveness of vaccines.




					news.sky.com


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 28, 2020)

2022 before a Covid vaccine is available to all in EU
					

There will not be sufficient doses of a coronavirus vaccine to cover the wider EU population before 2022, officials said today in an internal meeting.




					www.rte.ie
				



2022 before a Covid vaccine is available to all in EU

😳😟


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 29, 2020)

Some speculation that the Pfizer vaccine may beat the Oxford one to be administered to the UK public first.









						Pfizer in ‘last mile’ of creating vaccine
					

Pfizer has reached the “last mile” of developing a Covid-19 vaccine, but “patience” is required before the company releases crucial trial data, its chief execu




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 29, 2020)

platinumsage said:


> Some speculation that the Pfizer vaccine may beat the Oxford one to be administered to the UK public first.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Speculation from Pfizer themselves by the looks of it.  Buy Pfizer shares! Buy them now!


----------



## LDC (Oct 29, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> This is worth reading in full.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Bingham was interviewed in depth on the BBC yesterday. It was a long good interview, despite the interviewer clearly being a bit out of her depth and trying to get headline quotes. Bingham came across as brilliant, and spoke really well and clearly. Well worth a watch.


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 29, 2020)




----------



## Doodler (Oct 29, 2020)

prunus said:


> You do realise that ‘saline’ is an anagram of ‘aliens’...



 #dotheresearch


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 29, 2020)

The39thStep said:


> View attachment 236460




Conspiracy theories/made up nonsenses are usually *FAR* dodgier than that one


----------



## Supine (Oct 31, 2020)

Interesting slides leaked on covid vaccines. Including which the uk are tracking and who will get them...


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 1, 2020)

The reason today why _today's _Guardian annoyed me** was by using the word 'Annoyingmas' in the lockdown-related front page headline! 

**(as not at all unusually!  )

Mind you, despite another headline-use of '[Censored]mas'  , I thought that the main contents of  this big vaccine piece inside, were *well* worth the read  :




			
				Guardian headline said:
			
		

> *'It's possible' : the race to approve a Covid vaccine by [Censored]mas*
> *At least three companies close to revealing results of phase three trials, but to be approved for use safety has to be ensured*


And quoting Kate Bingham, described as head of the UK's vaccine taskforce :




			
				Sarah Boseley said:
			
		

> .... sometime in November or December, their independent monitoring boards will “unblind” their secret data to find out whether fewer people given the experimental vaccines are getting Covid-19.
> The excitement is palpable. Bingham understands that.
> 
> “I can just see that it’s such an incredibly sensitive topic, that everyone is so desperate to be out of lockdown and get back to normal that everyone grabs at straws,” she said.
> “I think my key message is, we’re in a very good place. The UK is well set up, we’ve got a very attractive portfolio. We are absolutely well-planned and well-organised in terms of having the right vaccines and knowing when they’re arriving.”





> The UK has bought six of the hundreds of vaccines under development. It has two of the three companies heading down the final furlong – AstraZeneca’s and Pfizer’s. Bingham says she thinks there is a chance of a vaccine before  [Censored!]mas
> 
> “They have to have enough cases to show vaccine efficacy and the regulator has to approve it. If all of that happens, then it’s possible that we could have a vaccine this side of [Censored!]mas,” she said.
> 
> “But, you know, I’ve called it a slim chance and I think it is a slim chance. I think we’ve got a better chance of generating that data early next year, but it’s not to say it’s impossible.”



If your read the whole article (and try to ignore the annoying Xmas references!), I think you'll see a half-way reasonable balance between unrealistic   optimism (lots of caveats there) and stupidly pessimistic 'nothing until December 2021' -type stuff ........

<crosses fingers yet again!  >


----------



## LDC (Nov 2, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Bingham was interviewed in depth on the BBC yesterday. It was a long good interview, despite the interviewer clearly being a bit out of her depth and trying to get headline quotes. Bingham came across as brilliant, and spoke really well and clearly. Well worth a watch.



FFS.  









						UK's vaccine taskforce chief shared sensitive documents in US, report says
					

Government sources say information was already public and incorrectly labelled ‘official sensitive’




					www.theguardian.com
				




I idiotically assumed she was some high up vaccine NHS expert, not a fucking venture capitalist married to a Tory. I'm fully able to believe the documents were labelled incorrectly, it's the private equity meeting that makes me puke.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 2, 2020)

Just today picked up on  that later story about Kate Bingham 

Yes, I was like you LynnDoyleCooper -- from that earlier Guardian story, she sounded like she knew what she was talking about 

I guess this latest thing doesn't _completely_ invalidate the one I quoted yesterday, but I should have been more suspicious of her Tory-type Xmas references


----------



## Supine (Nov 3, 2020)

BIG NEWS ALERT (if true)



			https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/breaking-news/covid-vaccine-des-set-to-be-announced-imminently-for-december-start/


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 3, 2020)

Supine said:


> BIG NEWS ALERT (if true)
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/breaking-news/covid-vaccine-des-set-to-be-announced-imminently-for-december-start/



Interesting! 

But the first paragraph read :




			
				Pulse said:
			
		

> *Exclusive *: A new DES is set to be announced imminently for practices and PCNs to start administering a Covid vaccine from the beginning of December, Pulse understands.



What does 'DES' mean, can someone explain? 

Cheers


----------



## prunus (Nov 3, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> Interesting!
> 
> But the first paragraph read :
> 
> ...



Directed enhanced service. Basically specialised targeted vaccination program.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 3, 2020)

prunus said:


> Directed enhanced service. Basically specialised targeted vaccination program.



Thanks a lot -- I was guessing at 'Service' already, but I couldn't guess the 'DE' bit!


----------



## Supine (Nov 3, 2020)

Good news. A week or two ago I read about a German initiative to have local vaccination centres setup to do covid shots within hours of a vaccine being approved. I was a bit pissed off that we hadn't heard anything similar in the UK.


----------



## Supine (Nov 4, 2020)

Long read - update on the Oxford / AZ vaccine

-------
AstraZeneca has a good chance of delivering late-phase data on its COVID-19 vaccine this year, the chief investigator of the Oxford Vaccine Trial said. The timing gives AstraZeneca a “small chance” of being able to start distributing the AZD1222 vaccine in the U.K. before Christmas.

Andrew Pollard, M.D., Ph.D., made the comments at a meeting of a U.K. parliamentary committee in his capacity as chief investigator of global AZD1222 clinical trials sponsored by the University of Oxford. While AstraZeneca is the sponsor of late-phase AZD1222 trials in the U.S. and Russia, Oxford, the originator of the vaccine, is taking the lead on phase 3 studies in Brazil and the U.K.

Pollard’s prominent position in the COVID-19 vaccine race led politicians on the U.K.’s Science and Technology Committee to call him to give evidence on Wednesday. Asked about when AZD1222 will be available, Pollard explained that the first step is to reach the point at which data are ready for analysis.

“I'm optimistic that we could reach that point before the end of this year,” Pollard said.
If the data are positive, the vaccine will need to undergo regulatory review and then be deployed to the groups identified as the first recipients in a long queue. Pollard said the timelines for those steps “are not entirely clear to me at the moment.” Efforts to accelerate the steps could be complicated by the near-simultaneous submission of multiple COVID-19 vaccines for approval.

Faced with multiple uncertainties, Pollard said it is “very difficult” to say whether AZD1222 will come to market in the U.K. by Christmas. The Oxford professor sees a “small chance” of that happening.

The timing will depend, in part, on the efficacy of the vaccine. As Pollard explained, efficacy affects the number of COVID-19 cases a study needs to show whether a vaccine works. If the vaccine is only 50% effective, more participants in the trial will need to develop COVID-19 to show it works. 
Pollard hopes AZD1222 and other vaccines will be more than 50% effective. That would cut the time it takes for sponsors to show efficacy and mean the vaccines are more impactful when rolled out to populations. Yet, Pollard also said policymakers may need to consider what they will do if vaccines fall short of the 50% effectiveness bar set by the FDA.
“If vaccines only prevented 40% of the cases, would that be useful for the NHS? These are the sorts of decisions that potentially policy makers may need to be thinking through in the months ahead depending on where vaccines land,” Pollard said.

Pollard spoke at the same session as Robin Shattock, the lead for Imperial College London’s COVID-19 vaccine. Imperial is developing a self-amplifying RNA (saRNA) vaccine. 

Like mRNA vaccines such as those in development at BioNTech and Moderna, saRNA jabs carry nucleic acids designed to make cells in the body produce an antigen. The difference is saRNA also encodes for proteins that enable RNA vaccine replication, potentially enabling them to provide protection at lower doses than is possible with mRNA.
Working with a novel platform, Imperial trailed Oxford into the clinic and remains behind. Shattock said his team could generate an efficacy signal midway through 2021 “with the right level of support.” The U.K. government has helped Imperial reach this point. Shattock made the case for further support at the committee meeting.

“One of the advantages of the technology that we're developing is that it can be used for repeated boosting immunizations, either to boost existing vaccines or to boost itself. So, if immunity wanes we would be well positioned with this technology to provide boosting strategies for the U.K.,” Shattock said.


----------



## Cloo (Nov 5, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> This is worth reading in full.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The more I think about it, the more it seems that any vaccine, especially if it comes in the next 12 months, is not going to be a 'Yay, we've vaccinated everyone, back to life as normal!' but more 'We're trying this out, but we don't know if it will work for everyone or for how long, so while we can reopen we're going to have to keep social distancing and masks so it won't just explode if we're wrong'


----------



## Supine (Nov 5, 2020)

Start rolling out vaccine A to people X. After 3, 6, 12 months look to see how well it did.

Other countries will be rolling out vaccine B to people X. Did they do better or worse than us?

It's going to get really complicated to work out which vaccines are best. At least it will make our lives more normal while the boffins work out which vaccines win the race.


----------



## Cloo (Nov 6, 2020)

Yes, I can definitely see something like that happening, that would make sense - I think things will be able to reopen more, but still with distancing/limited numbers and masks, until we can understand more about what works.


----------



## Fez909 (Nov 6, 2020)

Human recombinant soluble ACE2 (hrsACE2) shows promise for treating severe COVIDÂ19 - Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy
					






					www.nature.com
				





> A recent study by Zoufaly et al. published in _The Lancet Respiratory Medicine_ describes encouraging data from the first severe COVID-19 patient successfully treated with human recombinant soluble angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (hrsACE2).1 The published data document upon treatment of an adaptive immune response, the disappearance of the virus swiftly from the serum, the nasal cavity and lungs, and a reduction of inflammatory cytokine levels that are critical for COVID-19 pathology. Notably, the use of hrsACE2 did not impede the generation of neutralizing antibodies, leading to a significant clinical improvement of the treated patient.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 6, 2020)

Cloo said:


> The more I think about it, the more it seems that any vaccine, especially if it comes in the next 12 months, is not going to be a 'Yay, we've vaccinated everyone, back to life as normal!' but more 'We're trying this out, but we don't know if it will work for everyone or for how long, so while we can reopen we're going to have to keep social distancing and masks so it won't just explode if we're wrong'



Sure but it was never likely to be.  Because of the time frames involved the best we can really hope for is safe and _good enough_.  It'll get better over time.


----------



## Supine (Nov 9, 2020)

Skillz









						Covid vaccine: First 'milestone' vaccine offers 90% protection
					

The vaccine is a "significant step" forward for getting life back to normal, but challenges remain.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## editor (Nov 9, 2020)

Supine said:


> Skillz
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Some hope at last!


----------



## teuchter (Nov 9, 2020)

> However, there are logistical challenges as the vaccine has to be kept in ultra-cold storage at below minus 80C.



This sounds like quite a big logistical challenge.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 9, 2020)

teuchter said:


> This sounds like quite a big logistical challenge.


If the claim (shareholders statement) is actually true then the roll out of 30m in the UK alone will be made more than a big logistical challenge . If the contract to distribute is anything like EVERY SINGLE THING that has preceded it then we have a long (and likely expensive) wait for any impact.

#glasshalffull


----------



## LDC (Nov 9, 2020)

GP friend been told to make plans for a roll-out of a vaccine to their patients later this year. Plans in case it happens and everything is ready to go, rather than it being a certainty. Looking promising though. I've got my second dose of the Novavax trial end of this week, it's a protein sub-unit based one rather than the RNA based one by Pfizer and BioNTech. I think no RNA vaccines have been approved for human use before, so this would be the first ever.


----------



## Supine (Nov 9, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> GP friend been told to make plans for a roll-out of a vaccine to their patients later this year. Plans in case it happens and everything is ready to go, rather than it being a certainty. Looking promising though. I've got my second dose of the Novavax trial end of this week, it's a protein sub-unit based one rather than the RNA based one by Pfizer and BioNTech. I think no RNA vaccines have been approved for human use before, so this would be the first ever.



Can people have multiple vaccine types used on them?


----------



## teuchter (Nov 9, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> . I think no RNA vaccines have been approved for human use before, so this would be the first ever.


No doubt the anti-vaxxers will be onto this.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 9, 2020)

teuchter said:


> No doubt the anti-vaxxers will be onto this.



The vaccine could be a glass of water and that lot would be onto it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2020)

Supine said:


> Can people have multiple vaccine types used on them?


like measles, mumps and rubella you mean?


----------



## LDC (Nov 9, 2020)

Supine said:


> Can people have multiple vaccine types used on them?



MMR different vaccines given together though, I wondered about the multiple vaccines for the same disease thing too.

I asked the question in my Novavax trial 'induction/intro' thing about what would happen if a vaccine for this virus becomes available, will I be able to have it being on this trial or might having had this impact having the other vaccine in any way. The answer was a bit vague, but seems that it would be fine, but I'd have to leave this trial and then they can tell me if I've had the placebo/vaccine, which they don't do for a year otherwise.

I also asked if I wanted another vaccine (say for international travel) if that would be OK, or would I have to leave the trial too. They weren't able to give me a clear answer about that.


----------



## LDC (Nov 9, 2020)

teuchter said:


> No doubt the anti-vaxxers will be onto this.



Wait til they see who's funding them.


----------



## Chilli.s (Nov 9, 2020)

Supine said:


> Skillz
> 
> 
> 
> ...


best news in months


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 9, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Wait til they see who's funding them.



Bill Gates?


----------



## Badgers (Nov 9, 2020)

Is it cynical (given the recent contract awarding and press manipulation) to be wary of this?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 9, 2020)

Trump is going to go apeshit that this was announced so soon after the election rather than before, what with Pfizer being an American company.


----------



## LDC (Nov 9, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Bill Gates?



Funding for the Novavax is Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness (CEPI), US Department of Defense, and Gates Foundation.
Funding for the Pfizer and BioNTech is unknown I think.... (cue 'The X Files' theme tune...)


----------



## Cloo (Nov 9, 2020)

I think even if this is effective, in terms of getting it out etc  it's probably too late to make a difference to this winter,  although maybe it could open things up a tad sooner in the spring? But lots of ifs on getting it out there, still.


----------



## LDC (Nov 9, 2020)

Badgers said:


> Is it cynical (given the recent contract awarding and press manipulation) to be wary of this?



I think the vaccine development etc. is very separate to all that stuff and I'd take it as good generally, but I think any news on any positive vaccine development is going to be jumped on by the media so I'd be skeptical it'll be as quick as they say/hope. My understanding is any vaccine will be given in phases; healthcare (and maybe key workers) and vulnerable groups first, then basically working the way down age categories. I think anything for majority of the general population is likely to be late winter (Feb 2021) or later realistically.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 9, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> I think the vaccine development etc. is very separate to all that stuff and I'd take it as good generally, but I think any news on vaccine development is going to be jumped on by the media so I'd be skeptical it'll be as quick as they say/hope. My understanding is any vaccine will be given in phases; healthcare (and maybe key workers) and vulnerable groups first, then basically working the way down age categories. I think anything for majority of the general population is likely to be late winter (Feb 2021) or later realistically.



Yep. taking at least 6-9 months to totally roll out.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 9, 2020)

Worth noting that unlike most countries, the UK has only ordered enough vaccine for half the population. So you’ll have no chance of getting this Pfizer vaccine if you’re aged under 50 without a specified high-risk health condition (or a health/care worker). This applies to all vaccines the UK government have ordered except the Oxford vaccine which they ordered more of before deciding on this policy.


----------



## Winot (Nov 9, 2020)

This was encouraging.


----------



## Tankus (Nov 9, 2020)

Badgers said:


> Is it cynical (given the recent contract awarding and press manipulation) to be wary of this?


 A press  release  rather  than  a  peer reviewed  paper   ?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2020)

Supine said:


> BIG NEWS ALERT (if true)
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/breaking-news/covid-vaccine-des-set-to-be-announced-imminently-for-december-start/


I'm slightly confused by that story, does it mean the vaccine now has regulatory approval?


----------



## bimble (Nov 9, 2020)

look at the optimism of this - Zoom's share price just dropped off a cliff with everyone imagining back to normal any day now


----------



## Supine (Nov 9, 2020)

Wilf said:


> I'm slightly confused by that story, does it mean the vaccine now has regulatory approval?



No. But they want to get ready to vaccinate as soon as it passes.


----------



## LDC (Nov 9, 2020)

Wilf said:


> I'm slightly confused by that story, does it mean the vaccine now has regulatory approval?



No, none have yet for use in the UK.


----------



## lizzieloo (Nov 9, 2020)

elbows said:


> And this might loom larger in the collective memory of older people in the USA because of the absolute disaster they had with the rushed 1976 vaccine for the 'flu pandemic that never was'.



Have you got a link about that? Don't want to derail this thread.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> No, none have yet for use in the UK.


Cheers. Suppose I'm just wondering about the nods and winks that must have been given for these plans to be put in place. Realise this is ultimately about sales and market positioning, but some of the drug companies must have access to preliminary data and a real sense of whether their vaccine is working.


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2020)

lizzieloo said:


> Have you got a link about that? Don't want to derail this thread.











						Swine flu 'debacle' of 1976 is recalled
					

Swine flu 'debacle' of 1976 is recalled




					www.latimes.com
				








__





						WHO | Swine flu of 1976: lessons from the past
					






					www.who.int
				












						The Public Health Legacy of the 1976 Swine Flu Outbreak
					

Is it responsible for some Americans' hesitancy to embrace vaccines?




					www.discovermagazine.com
				




The relevance to the current situation is mostly only on the 'older peoples in the USAs perceptions' front, since the big mistake in 1976 was acting against a pandemic that never actually ended up happening. Which also meant the there was no upside to balance the number of cases where the vaccine caused health problems and deaths against.

I would expect that the US 1976 experience is one of many reasons why 'the pandemic isnt real' sentiments got so much traction there this time around.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2020)

If we are about to get a functioning vaccine, I'm really pleased for the elderly, those in care homes and those who have been shielding for months (in practice, regardless of government categories). For a lot of those people, their lives have been really shitty for the last 6 months. Won't be 'there's your injection, life goes back to normal' thing, but light at the end of the tunnel, a chance to meet up with family and friends (assuming everything falls into place, the vaccine carries on working, doesn't cause significant side effects...).

One thing I'm already into thinking is 'which one will I get', as will other people.  I'd guess I'll be in something like the 3rd/4th wave as a pure guesstimate as I'll be 60 by the time this happens and have a couple of medical conditions.  Might be offered a vaccine say July onwards, who knows, by which time there will be reasonable evidence as to which works best. Don't want to get into that shit Little Britain sketch, but there could be an element of 'I don't want that one, I want that one' (not me so much, I like to think I'll be happy to go with any reasonable virus that is offered, but there will be refuseniks and campaigns, quite separately from the army of conspiraloons).


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2020)

I am neutral when it comes to optimism or pessimism regarding Covid-19 vaccines. I probably wont have much to say on the subject for some time yet, since my approach in this area is one of caution, and I also have a low ability to cope with all the hype and optimism which is inevitable right now, and is especially inevitable while the country is under increased restrictions. This isnt due to skepticism about the vaccines, just the timescale and how far ahead of the game some people will run with good news.

For example, this is the sort of detail that enables me to somewhat ground myself in the face of giddy vaccine news days. The bit about 8 people could have been better worded.



> The interim analysis looks at how many of those who got infected with Covid-19 had had the new vaccine and how many had the placebo. So far, 94 people have become infected with Covid-19 – this is three times more than the company originally planned, but since the analysis shows that 90% had not received the vaccine, it implies that no more than eight people had received it.
> 
> To confirm its efficacy rate, Pfizer said it will continue the trial until there are 164 Covid-19 cases among participants in vaccinated and non-vaccinated groups. Given the recent spike in US infection rates, that number could be reached by early December, Pfizer said.
> 
> The data is yet to be peer-reviewed or published in a medical journal. Pfizer said it would do so once it had results from the entire trial.



41m ago 14:00


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2020)

platinumsage said:


> Worth noting that unlike most countries, the UK has only ordered enough vaccine for half the population. So you’ll have no chance of getting this Pfizer vaccine if you’re aged under 50 without a specified high-risk health condition (or a health/care worker). This applies to all vaccines the UK government have ordered except the Oxford vaccine which they ordered more of before deciding on this policy.



And I believe the vaccine in the news today requires 2 doses, so the 30 million orders will only cover 15 million people.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 9, 2020)

I'm 42 and don't have any other conditions which are relevant to the virus.  I know I'll be somewhere towards the back of the vaccine queue and I'm pretty relaxed by that.  Its just the prospect that we may be able to get back to some semblance of normal which I'm buoyed by.


----------



## Supine (Nov 9, 2020)

To manage expectations - only 94 patients caught covid so far in the study. They need 164 to release results. With small numbers like these the 90% result is very open to big changes when the next data set is analysed. It'll only take a few extra cases to knock the number down. Good start though.


----------



## PD58 (Nov 9, 2020)

I think more challenging will be that it has to be kept at below - 80C - not something the GP is going to be able to do?


----------



## prunus (Nov 9, 2020)

platinumsage said:


> Worth noting that unlike most countries, the UK has only ordered enough vaccine for half the population. So you’ll have no chance of getting this Pfizer vaccine if you’re aged under 50 without a specified high-risk health condition (or a health/care worker). This applies to all vaccines the UK government have ordered except the Oxford vaccine which they ordered more of before deciding on this policy.



Less than a quarter of the country I think - 30m doses and 2 doses required per person.

Pfizer reckon they can make enough for about 650m people by the end of next year - NB this is a ‘cold chain’ vaccine - needs to be stored at -80 and handled very carefully, so the majority of those doses are going to be in the developed world. I would imagine our (UK) best hope for mass vaccination outside critically vulnerable groups is that the Oxford vaccine comes up trumps too.

But the fact that it works, and apparently works so well, is huge news - that really was the big who knows?


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Nov 9, 2020)

PD58 said:


> I think more challenging will be that it has to be kept at below - 80C - not something the GP is going to be able to do?



Liquid nitrogen storage is quite commonplace now I’d have thought?


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 9, 2020)

elbows said:


> And I believe the vaccine in the news today requires 2 doses, so the 30 million orders will only cover 15 million people.



They added 10 million doses to that at some point.


----------



## prunus (Nov 9, 2020)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Liquid nitrogen storage is quite commonplace now I’d have thought?



You don’t need to go as extreme as that! LN2 is -200. -80 freezers are not uncommon - the lab I used to work in had loads of them all over the place.

I suppose transport rather than storage is going to be the limiting factor - we used to get our nucleotides delivered in dry ice pellets (-78 or lower), which is I imagine how it’ll be done.  Will look very space-age opening the truck.


----------



## Crispy (Nov 9, 2020)

Good overview of the logistics challenge in this video


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2020)

Supine said:


> To manage expectations - only 94 patients caught covid so far in the study. They need 164 to release results. With small numbers like these the 90% result is very open to big changes when the next data set is analysed. It'll only take a few extra cases to knock the number down. Good start though.


Though presumably, when they get to 164, if it remains above 80% say, that's still a pretty good outcome? You'd need a bigger % of the population inoculated to get towards herd immunity and the rest, but they would go ahead with it.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 9, 2020)

Crispy said:


> Good overview of the logistics challenge in this video




Thanks for posting that, that's very good.   

William of Walworth, that video helps to answer your questions about why it'll take so long to roll-out the vaccination programme.


----------



## LDC (Nov 9, 2020)

JCVI been mentioned on the daily briefing. Here's their provisional priority list for vaccination in the UK.









						[Withdrawn] JCVI: updated interim advice on priority groups for COVID-19 vaccination
					






					www.gov.uk


----------



## Johnny Doe (Nov 9, 2020)

. Edited as link wouldn't work : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-54869918

This guy sounds positive and appears to be quailified to judge....


----------



## cyril_smear (Nov 9, 2020)

What happens when in 12 months time when babies start being born with deformities


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2020)

That looks like a rather 'administrative solution' to me and one that would piss me off if I was a 30 year with a serious condition. Might well be right that mass inoculation predominantly by age works best, but it doesn't in itself meet the individual risks faced by younger people (though the speediest delivery to the whole population is in everyone's interest of course).



> The committee strongly agree that a simple age-based programme will likely result in faster delivery and better uptake in those at the highest risk...
> 
> older adults’ resident in a care home and care home workers1
> all those 80 years of age and over and health and social care workers1
> ...


Edit: that was from the link mentioned above - JCVI: updated interim advice on priority groups for COVID-19 vaccination


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2020)

cyril_smear said:


> What happens when in 12 months time when babies start being born with deformities


… erm, do you imagine they will?


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 9, 2020)

cyril_smear said:


> What happens when in 12 months time when babies start being born with deformities



We will be able to say with a great level of confidence that its not the vaccine that caused it.  People young enough to be having children are very unlikely to be getting the vaccine in 2021.


----------



## cyril_smear (Nov 9, 2020)

Wilf said:


> … erm, do you imagine they will?



Did they imagine it would happen in the 60s with thalidomide? It’s my understanding that these trials generally take years before approval.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 9, 2020)

cyril_smear said:


> Did they imagine it would happen in the 60s with thalidomide? It’s my understanding that these trials generally take years before approval.



People always dredge up thalidomide whilst ignoring all the other incredible breakthroughs since then.  I feel like an old man but thalidomide (still on the market by the way as its a decent drug) was a couple of decades before I was born.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 9, 2020)

cyril_smear said:


> Did they imagine it would happen in the 60s with thalidomide? It’s my understanding that these trials generally take years before approval.



Science has somewhat moved on since then.


----------



## CNT36 (Nov 9, 2020)

cyril_smear said:


> What happens when in 12 months time when babies start being born with deformities


We'll know where to find you.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2020)

cyril_smear said:


> Did they imagine it would happen in the 60s with thalidomide? It’s my understanding that these trials generally take years before approval.


The risks vs benefits of this accelerated process are well known and I'll be mildly apprehensive when it comes to my turn to get the vaccine. But going on about Thalidomide really doesn't help.


----------



## Johnny Doe (Nov 9, 2020)

Wilf said:


> The risks vs benefits of this accelerated process are well known and I'll be mildly apprehensive when it comes to my turn to get the vaccine. But going on about Thalidomide really doesn't help.



Also worth noting that those at greatest risk from the virus would be the the earliest to get the vaccine, looking at the order of priority of above, so the allocation of the that risk seems fair.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 9, 2020)

How do they know it is 90% effective? How many people have had the vaccine so far, and do they have any idea how long it lasts?


----------



## Epona (Nov 9, 2020)

cyril_smear said:


> Did they imagine it would happen in the 60s with thalidomide? It’s my understanding that these trials generally take years before approval.



The main issue with thalidomide and the impact of it was that it was discovered to have a side effect of inhibiting nausea, and was branded and marketed as a remedy for morning sickness.

A Covid vaccine is not going to be targeted at women in early pregnancy in the same way.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 9, 2020)

The fact that this Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine needs to be stored at around -90F / -68c is going to be a major problem.

Let's hope the Oxford vaccine proves safe & effective, because a quick google indicates that can be stored at between -2 and-8c, far more useful.


----------



## Supine (Nov 9, 2020)

Thalidomide wasn't a vaccine


----------



## Badgers (Nov 9, 2020)

Any details on the shareholders?


----------



## cyril_smear (Nov 9, 2020)

CNT36 said:


> We'll know where to find you.


 
I don’t get it?


----------



## cyril_smear (Nov 9, 2020)

Epona said:


> The main issue with thalidomide and the impact of it was that it was discovered to have a side effect of inhibiting nausea, and was branded and marketed as a remedy for morning sickness.
> 
> A Covid vaccine is not going to be targeted at women in early pregnancy in the same way.


But could be administered to women in early stage pregnancy potentially


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2020)

Harry Smiles said:


> Also worth noting that those at greatest risk from the virus would be the the earliest to get the vaccine, looking at the order of priority of above, so the allocation of the that risk seems fair.


… though I'm not convinced that list does capture that fully, for example the 30 year old who is highly vulnerable doesn't come near the top. But that's just going off the list, there may be scope for GPs to prioritise. Just got a sense this is going to be so big logistically they are keen to stick with broad brush risk for most people.


----------



## cyril_smear (Nov 9, 2020)

Wilf said:


> The risks vs benefits of this accelerated process are well known and I'll be mildly apprehensive when it comes to my turn to get the vaccine. But going on about Thalidomide really doesn't help.



I wasn’t “going on about thalidomide” as you put it. I’m saying, as per the post I made, that these medical trials usually are very thorough, and not just done over a matter of months. They’ve also, as I believe, only being carried out on healthy young people.

I’m not one of those mental anti vax people, but, like yourself, I won’t be in a rush to get it.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 9, 2020)

cyril_smear said:


> I wasn’t “going on about thalidomide” as you put it. I’m saying, as per the post I made, that these medical trials usually are very thorough, and not just done over a matter of months. They’ve also, as I believe, only being carried out on healthy young people.
> 
> I’m not one of those mental anti vax people, but, like yourself, I won’t be in a rush to get it.



Yes, the situation is far from ideal.  In an ideal world there would be a lot longer to go through the various processes but due to the level of deaths and everything else that is happening at the moment we do not really have the luxury of time.  Globally something like 5k people are dying daily and quite frankly that is only the tip of the iceberg, so things have to be balanced.

The older you gets the much much greater chance there is of having a bad outcome from being infected with covid. Those in higher risk groups will of course have to weigh up the odds but its a very privileged position to be in to be more concerned about a vaccine than the virus.


----------



## Johnny Doe (Nov 9, 2020)

Wilf said:


> … though I'm not convinced that list does capture that fully, for example the 30 year old who is highly vulnerable doesn't come near the top. But that's just going off the list, there may be scope for GPs to prioritise. Just got a sense this is going to be so big logistically they are keen to stick with broad brush risk for most people.



Yeah, my view on the broad brush list was a broad brush view, but I'd hope GPs would use a detail for cutting in, *

*Brush reference and decorating analogy ends here


----------



## Cloo (Nov 9, 2020)

Picking up on Teaboy 's point,  I may have mentioned here before an interesting thing I heard about Swine flu vaccine - that when it was given to a broad population, they found about 1800 people out of millions developed narcolepsy, which sucked for them, but at the end of the day was worth it to stop swine flu in the most affected areas. It's possible a small % (which could add up to a lot of people) could have side effects from this, but it may just have to be seen as acceptable collateral for getting it under control and stopping the physical, psychological and economic onslaught


----------



## prunus (Nov 9, 2020)

frogwoman said:


> How do they know it is 90% effective? How many people have had the vaccine so far, and do they have any idea how long it lasts?



To your second question: no, they have no idea.

To your first question: they give 1000 people the vaccine, and 1000 people a placebo, then let the people go about their normal business

After some time, 100 people in the placebo group have caught the virus. One would therefore expect 100 people in the vaccine group to have caught it also (on average). However only 10 people have caught it - the inference is then that 90 people have been protected because they had the vaccine - it’s 90% protective.


----------



## komodo (Nov 9, 2020)

My Dad 93, vaccinate and fi for his age caught flu, (type A) in February and recovered after 3 weeks in hospital (was on oxygen etc). This ties in with flu vaccine not working that well on the very elderly.
He went into a care home recently and tested positive for COVID-1. He was a bit off colour for a couple of days but is now fine and quite chirpy. I’ve heard from contacts that there a lot of positive tests from care homes that fortunately don’t result in the drastic consequences. Maybe because staff are using PPE now. Anyway is there any data on that?
We can’t see him ofcourse. But fortunately can phone him.
I presume there will be no problem re giving people like my Dad who have already tested positive the vaccine?


----------



## Cloo (Nov 9, 2020)

Most papers for tomorrow leading with LIFE BACK TO NORMAL BY SPRING! type headlines - a lot of people are going to be disappointed.

I think 2021 will be better and more 'normal' than 2020, but I can't imagine we can just drop all distancing, using masks and just go back to having big gatherings until the vaccine and the virus have been around longer.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2020)

cyril_smear said:


> I’m not one of those mental anti vax people, but, like yourself, I won’t be in a rush to get it.


I didn't quite say that, I'll actually be quite keen to get the vaccine and hope enough other people do to get something like herd immunity.  My MH means I get anxious about both taking meds and not taking meds. That's without ever coming over remotely Ickeist, it's just my overly reflective thing. But there's a bigger picture in terms of the risk of catching Covid as well as the need to move towards herd immunity.  So yeah, in the absence of any real concerns about the specific vaccine offered, I'll be taking it.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2020)

Cloo said:


> Most papers for tomorrow leading with LIFE BACK TO NORMAL BY SPRING! type headlines - a lot of people are going to be disappointed.
> 
> I think 2021 will be better and more 'normal' than 2020, but I can't imagine we can just drop all distancing, using masks and just go back to having big gatherings until the vaccine and the virus have been around longer.


Clearly the tories are desperate to get rid of lockdown and all the other restrictions and costs. My guess is that as soon as the vaccine(s) start getting rolled out into anything like a significant % of the population, they will start peeling the restrictions away.  We'll be left 6 feet apart, masked and hand washing, not much else. It's not so much that they know the vaccine will be cutting cases right back, it's more that it will be providing cover for their strategy.


----------



## Epona (Nov 10, 2020)

Wilf said:


> I didn't quite say that, I'll actually be quite keen to get the vaccine and hope enough other people do to get something like herd immunity.  My MH means I get anxious about both taking meds and not taking meds. That's without ever coming over remotely Ickeist, it's just my overly reflective thing. But there's a bigger picture in terms of the risk of catching Covid as well as the need to move towards herd immunity.  So yeah, in the absence of any real concerns about the specific vaccine offered, I'll be taking it.


That is a very fair comment and probably sums up how a lot of us feel - I don't feel immediately confident in a vaccine but I don't feel confident in my ability to survive covid either (I am somewhat in the middle in terms of risk)- and tbh the decision is not in my hands - my husband and parents will be offered any vaccine long before I will and it will be up to them.

I saw quite a good documentary not long ago about polio and Salk's work to develop a vaccine.  The main thing I took away from it though is that it is more normal than not in the history of humans to live with the fear of disease that cannot be cured or vaccinated against.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 10, 2020)

To be fair, Pfizer have had a pretty fair track record in the past of getting their medicines to stand up and perform ...

<Runs away to work   >


----------



## LDC (Nov 10, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Clearly the tories are desperate to get rid of lockdown and all the other restrictions and costs. My guess is that as soon as the vaccine(s) start getting rolled out into anything like a significant % of the population, they will start peeling the restrictions away.  We'll be left 6 feet apart, masked and hand washing, not much else. It's not so much that they know the vaccine will be cutting cases right back, it's more that it will be providing cover for their strategy.



Totally that will happen. I also have concerns that people will hear these headlines now, misunderstand, and it will then fuel people ignoring the restrictions we have.

Van-Tam yesterday tried to make it clear it wouldn't make any difference to this wave but maybe the next. It also needs 2 doses (21-28 days apart) and then full effectiveness starts about 14 days after the second dose, so 5-6 weeks from first dose.


----------



## Cloo (Nov 10, 2020)

I worry that people will be extra careless at Christmas 'because we'll have the vaccine any minute now anyway'


----------



## Badgers (Nov 10, 2020)

Cloo said:


> I worry that people will be extra careless at Christmas 'because we'll have the vaccine any minute now anyway'


They are already being careless sadly.


----------



## purenarcotic (Nov 10, 2020)

Assuming all continues to go well, I don’t expect things to totally return to normal until 2022. I think it’s a long game; a mixture of time it takes to get everyone vaccinated, time taken to get additional stock to what we have already ordered, the fact that even with a vaccine there will be a sizeable group of people too frightened to return to ‘normal’ life ‘just in case’, the anti-vaxxers... 

I am cautiously quite excited to hear it’s progressing well so far though.


----------



## Johnny Doe (Nov 10, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Totally that will happen. I also have concerns that people will hear these headlines now, misunderstand, and it will then fuel people ignoring the restrictions we have.



I think that's inevitable really. It's a bit of a double-bind, it does a appear to be good news, which I think some people really needed, but the effects on behaviour are likely to be pretty damaging


----------



## Cloo (Nov 10, 2020)

Quite interesting outline of how a vaccination programme might work here: https://www.huffp.st/n51zl71


----------



## two sheds (Nov 10, 2020)

Cloo said:


> Quite interesting outline of how a vaccination programme might work here: https://www.huffp.st/n51zl71



WHAT??? 

Being delivered by GPs and pharmacists? What happened to SERCO?  (((SERCO profits)))


----------



## Artaxerxes (Nov 10, 2020)

two sheds said:


> WHAT???
> 
> Being delivered by GPs and pharmacists? What happened to SERCO?  (((SERCO profits)))



GPs and Pharmacists are already third party companies. And been milking the NHS longer and more efficiently than Serco.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 10, 2020)

Plus there will be plenty of opportunities for consultants and in the logistic chain.  Don't worry Serco will be just fine.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 10, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Clearly the tories are desperate to get rid of lockdown and all the other restrictions and costs. My guess is that as soon as the vaccine(s) start getting rolled out into anything like a significant % of the population, they will start peeling the restrictions away.  We'll be left 6 feet apart, masked and hand washing, not much else. It's not so much that they know the vaccine will be cutting cases right back, it's more that it will be providing cover for their strategy.



Yes, this has been a concern of mine for a while now.  The pressure to give up on restrictions has been quite high even when over 300 people are dying a day.  When that's down to an arbitrary number which the government deems acceptable you'll barely hear about it.  With the vast majority of deaths happening in care homes and ICU it'll be very easy to hide the bodies.


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2020)

Governments response to this pandemic are largely driven by hospitalisation rates, death rates are far lower down their list unless the level of death is so high that it causes logistical or political problems. As well as hospitalisation rates, of more concern to governments is what the virus does to staffing levels in key areas, and what it does to public confidence in resuming 'normal' economic activities of all sorts. If we end up in a situation where those issues dont set off major alarms, and where there arent any major differences internationally that would make us look like we'd gone out on an unsustainable limb compared to others, then government equations will be very different.

I do not subscribe to the idea that the vaccines will be asked to carry all the weight, I dont think mass testing plans are going away for a long time. Especially if vaccines are used at large scale, since in theory this increases the selection pressure on the virus, making it more likely that any strains that can avoid first generation vaccine acquired immunity may become the dominant strain, vastly complicating the vaccine picture and requiring much ongoing effort to deal with. This is not a complete certainty, it is on my list of things where it is too early to judge and where I will restrict myself to not looking too far ahead as a result.


----------



## Cloo (Nov 10, 2020)

If you can't vaccinate everyone in a fairly short space of time do you then, therefore, have to work out who is going to be the best 'value' to vaccinate initially, and what limitations you still need to maintain to allow it be any help?


----------



## elbows (Nov 10, 2020)

Cloo said:


> If you can't vaccinate everyone in a fairly short space of time do you then, therefore, have to work out who is going to be the best 'value' to vaccinate initially, and what limitations you still need to maintain to allow it be any help?



Yes. The government wont treat it like a silver bullet either, even though sections of the media will.

Someone already linked to the priorities list (which is subject to change) but here it is again        JCVI: updated interim advice on priority groups for COVID-19 vaccination


----------



## Johnny Doe (Nov 10, 2020)




----------



## two sheds (Nov 10, 2020)

Artaxerxes said:


> GPs and Pharmacists are already third party companies. And been milking the NHS longer and more efficiently than Serco.


fair point


----------



## nyxx (Nov 11, 2020)

This looks interesting.
There's a feature in the covid cough which is inaudible to us, but an algorithm is good at identifying it:








						Algorithm spots 'Covid cough' inaudible to humans
					

An algorithm built in the US correctly identified people with Covid-19 by the sound of their coughs.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Badgers (Nov 11, 2020)

Probably just coincidence


----------



## Badgers (Nov 11, 2020)

Lucky Pfizer CEO Bourla cashes out $5.6M worth of stock—perfectly legally—as COVID-19 vaccine data lift market
					

On Monday before the stock market opened, Pfizer announced that its COVID-19 mRNA vaccine had proven 90% effective so far in its ongoing late-stage trial, lifting the company’s shares nearly 8% thr | On Monday, the same day that Pfizer announced that its COVID-19 vaccine was 90% effective in a...




					www.fiercepharma.com


----------



## Anju (Nov 12, 2020)

Only tested on ferrets so far but sounds like a decent approach to tackling transmission of the virus. 

This Nasal Spray Will Help Prevent And Keep COVID-19 At Bay For 24 Hours


----------



## elbows (Nov 12, 2020)

I thought this slide from a press conference I didnt even see yesterday might be of interest.



From https://assets.publishing.service.g...file/934360/Data_Briefing_Slides_11112020.pdf


----------



## prunus (Nov 12, 2020)

elbows said:


> I thought this slide from a press conference I didnt even see yesterday might be of interest.
> 
> View attachment 238537
> 
> From https://assets.publishing.service.g...file/934360/Data_Briefing_Slides_11112020.pdf



I think those descriptors might have been written by a PPE (no the other type) graduate...


----------



## Cloo (Nov 12, 2020)

A good article here which is more optimistic than title suggests: Opinion | Don’t Get Too Excited About the Coronavirus Vaccine

Basically saying that having an end in sight changes the game for governments funding closed businesses and supporting unemployed people as it's now looking less likely that the duration is indefinite - it would be better to batten down the hatches for this winter and close restaurants, plan on a very limited Christmas etc to avoid a really massive winter spike before the vaccine can be implemented. 

I doubt they'll do this, because 'Christmas'   ,but I expect it means there could be less hesitation to, say, have a big lockdown after Christmas and just fucking fund everything to the hilt until spring.


----------



## Supine (Nov 12, 2020)

Vaccine news. Long read. 

While Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine turned in strong early efficacy numbers and NIAID director Anthony Fauci said he expects similar figures from Moderna, the new class of mRNA shots mostly comes with stringent storage requirements that raise logistical hurdles for a broad rollout. Except the program under development at CureVac, which now reports its candidate is stable for up to three months at refrigerator temperatures.

Dubbed CVnCoV, CureVac's shot can also be kept for up to 24 hours at room temperature, further reducing burdens for vaccination efforts, the company said.

The German biotech, which advanced to phase 2a testing in late September, is "very encouraged by the emerging stability profile," of its vaccine candidate, chief production officer Florian von der Mülbe said in a statement. The profile "has the potential both to enable decentralized storage and to significantly facilitate large-scale vaccination efforts during the current pandemic," he added.

Other vaccines in the new mRNA class, such as the candidates from Pfizer and Moderna, need to be kept at subzero temperatures. Pfizer's shot requires storage at a frigid minus 94 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 70 degrees Celsius), and will only last about 24 hours at refrigerated temperatures between 35.6 and 46.4 degrees Fahrenheit. Despite the challenges, the company has an ambitious plan for its rollout.

Aware of the logistical challenges with its candidate, Pfizer is working on a powdered formulation for a potential rollout next year, chief scientist Mikael Dolsten told Business Insider.

This week, Pfizer reported the two-dose regimen was more than 90% effective in an early phase 3 analysis. Questions remain about the vaccine's safety, its durability of protection and its effects among various patient populations.

Sanofi and Translate Bio are advancing a vaccine that needs to be stored at an even colder 112 degrees below zero Fahrenheit. A spokeswoman this week said the team is “working on improving the stability," and is targeting a storage temperature of minus 4 degrees Fahrenheit. 

Meanwhile, Moderna is expected to post its first phase 3 data soon. That vaccine requires storage at minus 4 degrees Fahrenheit.
Outside the mRNA class, other players such as Sanofi, Johnson & Johnson and Novavax are advancing shots that can be stored at refrigerated temperatures. A J&J spokesman said the company anticipates its vaccine will be "compatible with standard distribution channels without the need for new distribution infrastructure."

CureVac this week posted more positive early data for its program, but questions about its tolerability remain. The company advanced to a phase 2a study in Peru and Panama back in September.


----------



## elbows (Nov 12, 2020)

Why no link to the article?









						CureVac's mRNA coronavirus shot boasts one advantage over Pfizer and Moderna counterparts—refrigerated storage
					

While Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine turned in strong efficacy numbers and NIAID director Anthony Fauci said he expects similar figures from Moderna, the new class of mRNA shots mostly comes with stringent storage requirements that raise logistical hurdles to a broad rollout. Except CureVac, which...




					www.fiercepharma.com


----------



## two sheds (Nov 13, 2020)

So that's at least three with 90% effectiveness they can combine them for 270%


----------



## Supine (Nov 13, 2020)

elbows said:


> Why no link to the article?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Because annoying pop up windows. What's the problem?


----------



## elbows (Nov 13, 2020)

Well in general I think its important to know the source, and thats what people almost always do.

I didnt know about the popups, I think my browser was automatically killing them (Safari).


----------



## LDC (Nov 13, 2020)

Just had my second dose of the Novavax trial vaccine/placebo. Had a good chat with one of the leading research doctors in the program while I was there and they were very cautious/pessimistic that a vaccine is anywhere near general usage, saying it's much more likely to be second half of next year at the earliest, and they were of the opinion the optimism around the Pfizer/BioNTech was partly driven by them, and partly by the government and media wanting 'good news' for us.

E2A: When I say leading I mean someone that's been interviewed about vaccines on TV and Google throws their name up straight away, not a doctor that was bullshitting a lot.


----------



## elbows (Nov 13, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Just had my second dose of the Novavax trial vaccine/placebo. Had a good chat with one of the leading research doctors in the program while I was there and they were very cautious/pessimistic that a vaccine is anywhere near general usage, saying it's much more likely to be second half of next year at the earliest, and they were of the opinion the optimism around the Pfizer/BioNTech was partly driven by them, and partly by the government and media wanting 'good news' for us.



It is certainly true that during periods of 'lockdown' there is a scrabble to find causes for optimism and 'light at the end of the tunnel'. The first time around this led to things like Hancock making all sorts of wild claims about testing that never came to fruition. I put the vaccine stuff partially in that category, but tthere is a bit more to it than just that. I am completely ignoring most talk about timescales.


----------



## kropotkin (Nov 13, 2020)

I agree with the latter. I'm also not very confident that the vaccine will be particularly useful, as as of today I now know four (personally) who have PCR confirmed reinfection within a ~6month interval. If prior infection can't make subsequent reinfection much less likely than this, I have little hope for a vaccine achieving it.


----------



## LDC (Nov 13, 2020)

kropotkin said:


> I agree with the latter. I'm also not very confident that the vaccine will be particularly useful, as as of today I now know four (personally) who have PCR confirmed reinfection within a ~6month interval. If prior infection can't make subsequent reinfection much less likely than this, I have little hope for a vaccine achieving it.



What's the outlook then if that's the case, constant rolling re-infections and death (or not) forever? With better treatments helping a bit along the way? Or a vaccine shot every few months?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 13, 2020)

kropotkin said:


> I agree with the latter. I'm also not very confident that the vaccine will be particularly useful, as as of today I now know four (personally) who have PCR confirmed reinfection within a ~6month interval. If prior infection can't make subsequent reinfection much less likely than this, I have little hope for a vaccine achieving it.



I know there's been a few reinfection cases reported, but from everything I've read, it has largely been dismissed as something very rare, but that's clearly not the case from your experience.

Shit.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 13, 2020)

kropotkin said:


> I agree with the latter. I'm also not very confident that the vaccine will be particularly useful, as as of today I now know four (personally) who have PCR confirmed reinfection within a ~6month interval. If prior infection can't make subsequent reinfection much less likely than this, I have little hope for a vaccine achieving it.



Blimey.  I only know one person that has had a positive test and only because he's my company MD.  Of my various friendship groups no one has had a confirmed test.  You know 4 people that have had two confirmed tests each.   I don't know what to make of this and can't really get my head around what it means.


----------



## elbows (Nov 13, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> Blimey.  I only know one person that has had a positive test and only because he's my company MD.  Of my various friendship groups no one has had a confirmed test.  You know 4 people that have had two confirmed tests each.   I don't know what to make of this and can't really get my head around what it means.



Being a healthcare worker is part of the context there.


----------



## kropotkin (Nov 13, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> Blimey.  I only know one person that has had a positive test and only because he's my company MD.  Of my various friendship groups no one has had a confirmed test.  You know 4 people that have had two confirmed tests each.   I don't know what to make of this and can't really get my head around what it means.


Yeah, I'm a physician working in acute medicine (and also running a covid ward) in one of the Trusts with the fastest rising caseload in the country. On the covid ward we have had 15 staff infected in the last week.


----------



## LDC (Nov 13, 2020)

kropotkin said:


> Yeah, I'm a physician working in acute medicine (and also running a covid ward) in one of the Trusts with the fastest rising caseload in the country. On the covid ward we have had 15 staff infected in the last week.



Would you say that's through work or outside, or no idea? If it's through work isn't that a serious infection control issue/failure?


----------



## kropotkin (Nov 13, 2020)

Through work, for sure. No problems with infection control failure I don't think.
My honest opinion is that coughing is an "aerosol generating procedure", and that close contact with multiple cohorted virally shedding patients with a viral pneumonia causes an increased risk of transmission even when wearing a plastic apron, gloves and a surgical mask.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 13, 2020)

What I took from the announcement on the Pfizer interim results was a headline good news story (the 90% protection), but a worrying lack of detail about everything else. Not knowing whether people who are protected can still pass it on; issues around reinfection; whether it reduces symptoms in those who do contract it etc.

I'm taking from that that the vaccine is the ideal tool to roll out _whilst still locked down_, to allow it suppress and contain. My fear is it will be deployed as political cover to reduce all the restrictions that have affected the economy. A kind of ideological vaccine.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 13, 2020)

kropotkin said:


> Through work, for sure. No problems with infection control failure I don't think.
> My honest opinion is that coughing is an "aerosol generating procedure", and that close contact with multiple cohorted virally shedding patients with a viral pneumonia causes an increased risk of transmission even when wearing a plastic apron, gloves and a surgical mask.



What just basic surgical masks?

Are staff working on covid wards not issued with the N95 respirator type masks?


----------



## elbows (Nov 13, 2020)

Genome-based hospital studies are being done in order to better understand transmission pathways and scenarios, and that will include staff and patients. There are lots of factors, including hundreds of patients across NHS England hospitals currently becoming infected in hospital every day. And staff passing it to each other, for example in staff communal areas, has sometimes been an area of concern and focus.

If routine, regular staff testing also ends up properly in place then we'd expect lots of cases to be picked up that would not have been detected if the people concerned did a different job that didnt involve routine testing.


----------



## kropotkin (Nov 13, 2020)

I suspect that some people are probably more prone to aerosol generation (structural airway stuff+type of cough??)


cupid_stunt said:


> What just basic surgical masks?
> 
> Are staff working on covid wards not issued with the N95 respirator type masks?


That's correct. As per PHE guidelines


----------



## elbows (Nov 13, 2020)

Indeed, just because the media stopped going on about acute PPE shortages doesnt mean we then implemented world class standards of PPE for all potentially risky scenarios. The guidelines have always been a fudge that was as much about what supplies were available and thus what was considered practical, as anything else.


----------



## LDC (Nov 13, 2020)

elbows said:


> Indeed, just because the media stopped going on about acute PPE shortages doesnt mean we then implemented world class standards of PPE for all potentially risky scenarios. The guidelines have always been a fudge that was as much about what supplies were available and thus what was considered practical, as anything else.



Yup. As mentioned back then a few of us had rows about it at my workplace in March and April, and we were told to shut the fuck up on threat of a disciplinary as it was what the PHE were recommending, subject over.


----------



## ignatious (Nov 13, 2020)

kropotkin said:


> I agree with the latter. I'm also not very confident that the vaccine will be particularly useful, as as of today I now know four (personally) who have PCR confirmed reinfection within a ~6month interval. If prior infection can't make subsequent reinfection much less likely than this, I have little hope for a vaccine achieving it.


Any info yet on how the severity of each infection compares - did they feel worse second time round or not as bad?


----------



## kropotkin (Nov 13, 2020)

One friend who is a palliative care consultant is more sick than first time round. Don't know about the others.
In other news, the outbreak is now 17 staff.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 13, 2020)

kropotkin said:


> One friend who is a palliative care consultant is more sick than first time round. Don't know about the others.
> In other news, the outbreak is now 17 staff.


Sounds a bit trite saying look after yourself, but as much as you can... look after yourself.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2020)

Still hope the Oxford vaccine will be approved by Christmas, and could be our main weapon against covid, as storage is easier and the cost is a fraction of the Pfizer/BioNTech one.



> Tens of millions of UK-made coronavirus vaccines will be ready for production by the end of the year, claims a professor overseeing the trial.
> 
> Professor Andrew Pollard, chief investigator of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine trial, was “optimistic” to get approval on the jab by Christmas.





> Professor Pollard said the Oxford vaccine will be ten times cheaper than the Pfizer/BioNTech jab and easier to deliver because it doesn't have to be stored at temperatures below -70C.
> 
> The director of the Oxford Vaccine Group told the Sun: “Ours are stored at fridge temperature.”





> AstraZeneca will deliver the vaccine on a not-for-profit basis, he added.
> 
> The Government has put in an order for 100million doses of the Oxford/AstraZeneca jab, which is believed to cost £2.23 per dose.
> 
> It has also ordered 40million doses of the Pfizer vaccine, which needs two injections thought to cost £29.47.











						Millions of UK-made coronavirus vaccines 'ready by Christmas', professor claims
					

Professor Andrew Pollard says the experimental vaccine developed by the University of Oxford and AstraZeneca is on the cusp of demonstrating “efficacy”, just days after Pfizer's huge announcement




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Mation (Nov 15, 2020)

prunus said:


> I think those descriptors might have been written by a PPE (no the other type) graduate...


Why? They're useful descriptions if you're presenting to non-scientists, or scientists in a very different field. You don't want to spend your time explaining concepts or settling for people not following what you mean later on. The idea is to communicate!


----------



## purenarcotic (Nov 15, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Yup. As mentioned back then a few of us had rows about it at my workplace in March and April, and we were told to shut the fuck up on threat of a disciplinary as it was what the PHE were recommending, subject over.



Why then, when the news goes into hospitals now am I seeing people in far, far more PPE than that? Visors, N95s, those biohazard type suits... Better managed hospital in terms of acquisition of PPE? Do those working in ITU get priority over more stuff?


----------



## quimcunx (Nov 15, 2020)

kropotkin said:


> Through work, for sure. No problems with infection control failure I don't think.
> My honest opinion is that coughing is an "aerosol generating procedure", and that close contact with multiple cohorted virally shedding patients with a viral pneumonia causes an increased risk of transmission even when wearing a plastic apron, gloves and a surgical mask.



What is the current situation regarding PPE? I thought this was what they declared was proper PPE when we couldn't source enough actual proper PPE?

E2a sorry just saw everyone also jumped on this.


----------



## LDC (Nov 15, 2020)

purenarcotic said:


> Why then, when the news goes into hospitals now am I seeing people in far, far more PPE than that? Visors, N95s, those biohazard type suits... Better managed hospital in terms of acquisition of PPE? Do those working in ITU get priority over more stuff?



They'll mostly be ICU staff who wear better PPE due to the procedures they do with patients, what is called 'aerosol generating procedures'. Staff in general contact in wards and departments don't wear that, although I know in some Trusts it might be a bit different.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Nov 15, 2020)

Labour calls for emergency censorship laws for anti-vax content
					

Shadow culture secretary says government should ‘stamp out’ misinformation




					www.independent.co.uk
				




Surely debunking these idiot’s misinformation at every opportunity would be a better route rather than censorship?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2020)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Labour calls for emergency censorship laws for anti-vax content
> 
> 
> Shadow culture secretary says government should ‘stamp out’ misinformation
> ...



It's a difficult one, trouble is debunking doesn't seem to work with these crazies, because they know the TROOF, and anything else is FAKE NEWS, so they just carry on spreading lies and sucking more people into their rabbit holes.

Starving them of the oxygen that allows them to do it is perhaps the only answer.


----------



## prunus (Nov 15, 2020)

Mation said:


> Why? They're useful descriptions if you're presenting to non-scientists, or scientists in a very different field. You don't want to spend your time explaining concepts or settling for people not following what you mean later on. The idea is to communicate!



What I think the problem is Is that what they are communicating is to a greater or lesser degree in the different cases wrong.  Clear communication is science is very important I agree, and often not done well (to say to the least).  But I think it’s important that as well as clear it is correct (possibly not complete, simplification is required of course, but the simplification shouldn’t actually break the message)

Now one might say that in this case it doesn’t matter if the information is actually correct, but that seems to me a bit perverse - you have an opportunity to convey some simple clear correct information to people about a subject that is going to be very important and interesting to anyone who has gone to the bother of reading these slides, so why not get it right?

A quick try at a fix for what I think are the two most misleading (bearing in mind I am not an immunology expert); in both (all in fact) cases the description can be followed by “injected into the body which triggers an immune response” as that’s how they all work

mRNA: instructions to the body’s cells to make coronavirus proteins

Protein/adjuvant: an engineered copy of a coronavirus protein mixed with an immune-stimulating chemical

The inactivated live virus description is more a description of the production method than the mode of action - and the word ‘killed’ is misleading, as implied by the word ‘live’ in the actual name of the vaccine; what actually is done is that the virus is treated so it can’t replicate (it’s poisoned, basically). So something like:

Inactivated live virus: coronavirus treated so that it cannot replicate [is injected into the body etc etc]

And the adenovirus description should just add that it’s a chimpanzee common cold virus, for accuracy (and why not while we’re at it replace ‘inside’ with ‘onto the surface of’, as that better describes how it works).

You might think that these differences are trivial so why do I care?  But I do, for two reasons: one as above is that it is supposed to be transmitting information, so it might as well do it clearly and accurately (and I don’t think my suggestions above are any harder to understand than the ones they used? I could be wrong?); the other is an insidious problem in science communication - the risk that someone taking in the original descriptions is later presented with the more accurate one, and the contradiction or apparent hiding of information undermines trust in scientific messaging: “what, the virus isn’t dead, I though it had been killed?” Or “why didn’t you tell me you were injecting me with a chimpanzee virus?” 

My original response was on the snide and unhelpful side, hopefully this is a better one.


----------



## Mation (Nov 15, 2020)

prunus said:


> What I think the problem is Is that what they are communicating is to a greater or lesser degree in the different cases wrong.  Clear communication is science is very important I agree, and often not done well (to say to the least).  But I think it’s important that as well as clear it is correct (possibly not complete, simplification is required of course, but the simplification shouldn’t actually break the message)
> 
> Now one might say that in this case it doesn’t matter if the information is actually correct, but that seems to me a bit perverse - you have an opportunity to convey some simple clear correct information to people about a subject that is going to be very important and interesting to anyone who has gone to the bother of reading these slides, so why not get it right?
> 
> ...


Much better! 

I completely agree with all of your reasoning there, and if I'd been writing the summaries, I'd have gone for accuracy first, too. Plain English shouldn't mean dumbing down. (But, tbh, I haven't actually read about each potential vaccine in any detail. Your versions do seem readable, though!)


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 15, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Still hope the Oxford vaccine will be approved by Christmas, and could be our main weapon against covid, as storage is easier and the cost is a fraction of the Pfizer/BioNTech one.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm quite sceptical of the Mirror's report there, what with Oxford not having announced any Phase 3 trial results yet (unless I've missed something big?  )

Saying that, Prof Pollard has been dropping several heavy hints recently about imminent announcements on effectiveness for the Oxford vaccine.
At least the above Mirror report reminds of several possible/potential advantages when/if it does come into use. Not least about storage *not at minus 70C!*


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> I'm quite sceptical of the Mirror's report there, what with Oxford not having announced any Phase 3 trial results yet (unless I've missed something big?  )



Due to be reported in the next couple of weeks, so it seems reasonable that approval by Christmas could happen.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 15, 2020)

New scientist has a piece on the Pfizer vaccine:

*



			Pfizer and its partner BioNTech say their coronavirus vaccine is 90 per cent effective in phase III trials. How excited should we be about the news, and what questions remain unanswered?
		
Click to expand...

*


> US drug maker Pfizer and its German partner BioNTech have today released some positive-looking results from a clinical trial of their experimental covid-19 vaccine BNT162b2.
> 
> 
> The headline figure is “90 per cent effective”. But that may not be quite as good news as it first appears.
> ...


----------



## teuchter (Nov 15, 2020)

Also:

*



Pfizer covid-19 vaccine may not need to be kept at -70°C after all

Click to expand...

*


> There may be no need to keep the Pfizer and BioNTech coronavirus vaccine and other similar vaccines at -70°C, potentially making it much easier to distribute them across the world. Two other teams using the same messenger RNA (mRNA) technology for their vaccines have found that they remain stable for at least three months in a normal fridge.
> 
> 
> The Pfizer and BioNTech vaccine candidate generated great excitement around the world this week when the companies announced that it appears to be more than 90 per cent effective based on early results. Yet concerns were raised about the fact that the vaccine needs to be stored at between -70°C and -80°C. This is far colder than standard freezers can manage and would greatly complicate the vaccine’s storage and distribution.
> ...


----------



## xenon (Nov 15, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> It's a difficult one, trouble is debunking doesn't seem to work with these crazies, because they know the TROOF, and anything else is FAKE NEWS, so they just carry on spreading lies and sucking more people into their rabbit holes.
> 
> Starving them of oxygen that allows them to do it is perhaps the only answer.




FFY.


They're talking about this on LBC just now. Not that these facebook , shitweb, silo'd freaks probably watch it but there's a case for the BBC to do a proper informative documentary about vaccine development process, the safety tests, the where would civilisation be if we had not routinely vaccinated for XYZ. Talk to people who've taken part in trials etc.


----------



## kropotkin (Nov 15, 2020)

purenarcotic said:


> Why then, when the news goes into hospitals now am I seeing people in far, far more PPE than that? Visors, N95s, those biohazard type suits... Better managed hospital in terms of acquisition of PPE? Do those working in ITU get priority over more stuff?


They'll be filming in itu if you see people wearing that (or in a respiratory hdu). Outside of those environments the PHE policy is that you don't need that level of ppe. I don't know of any hospitals that have gone outside that guidance


----------



## elbows (Nov 15, 2020)

BBC's latest attempt to balance peoples expectations:









						Covid-19: Normal life back next winter, says vaccine creator
					

Prof Ugur Sahin also raises hopes the vaccine, developed with Pfizer. could halve Covid transmission.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2020)

elbows said:


> BBC's latest attempt to balance peoples expectations:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sounds a bit more realistic at least. One of my old colleagues thought we would be getting vaccinated before Christmas


----------



## Sunray (Nov 15, 2020)

If it's not already obvious, don't rush vaccines.








						Past vaccine disasters show why rushing a coronavirus vaccine now would be 'colossally stupid'
					

Vaccine experts are warning the federal government against rushing out a coronavirus vaccine before testing has shown it's both safe and effective. Decades of history show why they're right.




					edition.cnn.com


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 15, 2020)

Am hoping Professor Sahin is just saying we won't be back to normal until next winter to avoid the situation where people assume that we have a vaccine now and they therefore don't need to take the same precautions.My mother will be ninety in January if things don't improve massively quite soon she has no chance.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2020)

Duncan2 said:


> Am hoping Professor Sahin is just saying we won't be back to normal until next winter to avoid the situation where people assume that we have a vaccine now and they therefore don't need to take the same precautions.My mother will be ninety in January if things don't improve massively quite soon she has no chance.



Plenty of experts have stated it'll be the 2nd or 3rd quarter of next year for enough people to have got vaccinated, and before we can start getting back to something like normal.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2020)

Duncan2 said:


> Am hoping Professor Sahin is just saying we won't be back to normal until next winter to avoid the situation where people assume that we have a vaccine now and they therefore don't need to take the same precautions.My mother will be ninety in January if things don't improve massively quite soon she has no chance.


Afraid that is pretty factual. Actually still pretty rapid for a vaccine to be signed off, produced and administered to a critical mass.


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 15, 2020)

Badgers said:


> Afraid that is pretty factual. Actually still pretty rapid for a vaccine to be signed off, produced and administered to a critical mass.


Will just have to push the old girl to the front of the queue when it does become available.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 15, 2020)

Sunray said:


> If it's not already obvious, don't rush vaccines.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The basic message of that article is fine - but the way it presents things feels questionable to me, as if it has absorbed some anti-vax messaging which it relays in a "just asking questions" kind of way. 

It talks about the Cutter incident - something that happened 70 years ago in the early days of vaccine history. It doesn't talk about improvements in test procedures that were prompted by that and which have had many decades to evolve. It doesn't discuss the actual impact of that incident in the context of the health picture at the time (tens of thousands of Americans dying of polio every year). It doesn't talk about the difference between technologies that are newly developed and technologies that build upon many years of experience of how things work 'for real'. 

Of course there should be great caution against rushing out stuff that's untested - but it also has to be balanced against the consequences of delay and the risks have to be meaningfully assessed. I don't like the tone of that article - I'm sure it will have been reposted on all the anti vax sites.


----------



## elbows (Nov 15, 2020)

teuchter said:


> The basic message of that article is fine - but the way it presents things feels questionable to me, as if it has absorbed some anti-vax messaging which it relays in a "just asking questions" kind of way.



Its from September 1st after some stupid things had been said, and its written for an American audience whose prior sensibilities about vaccines and past mistakes are somewhat different to ours. They have different historical references and had different scares and real issues in the past. And they have a more direct approach to confronting some of those issues. In the UK the mainstream conversation seems invariably to involve mostly referencing past scares that had no apparent basis, such as MMR and before that Whooping Cough, even though the latter doesnt seem to be referenced much these days and may have gone down the memory hole somewhat.


----------



## panpete (Nov 15, 2020)

Call me tinfoil hat if you like.
I won't be vaccinated, it's not that I don't believe in COVID I think the measures they are taking against it is about control. No gatherings, no protests, lockdowns knock on effects.
I wonder if the vaccine has microscopic nanobots in it, and what has Bill Gates got to do with inoculation?


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 16, 2020)

panpete said:


> *Call me tinfoil hat if you like.*
> I won't be vaccinated, it's not that I don't believe in COVID I think the measures they are taking against it is about control. No gatherings, no protests, lockdowns knock on effects.
> I wonder if the vaccine has microscopic nanobots in it, and what has Bill Gates got to do with inoculation?



Bolded bit : I'm _highly_ tempted to call you tinfoil hat after your above post, yes!


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2020)




----------



## NoXion (Nov 16, 2020)

panpete said:


> Call me tinfoil hat if you like.
> I won't be vaccinated, it's not that I don't believe in COVID I think the measures they are taking against it is about control. No gatherings, no protests, lockdowns knock on effects.
> I wonder if the vaccine has microscopic nanobots in it, and what has Bill Gates got to do with inoculation?



It _is_ about control. Specifically, controlling the spread of the virus. The coronavirus cannot reproduce without human hosts, and so it was always inevitable that efforts to control the spread of the virus would also involve limits on human contact. Despite this, protests like Black Lives Matter have still been happening even with the pandemic going on as well. Businesses based on large gatherings of people have suffered, because most people think that going to a concert isn't as important as civil protest. So even if lockdowns and other pandemic measures _did_ have some kind of sinister ulterior motive to suppress the civic spirit of the populace, it has manifestly failed in that objective, while devastating businesses.

If the kind of nanotechnology you're apparently referring to were to actually exist, the world would be a far different place. What makes you think that such a technology might currently exist? And wouldn't putting such bleeding-edge nanotechnology inside millions of people who aren't in on the conspiracy blow any notion of secrecy right into the stratosphere?

Bill Gates is a billionaire who wants to whitewash his legacy by attempting to be remembered as a philanthropist.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2020)

panpete said:


> Call me tinfoil hat if you like.
> I won't be vaccinated, it's not that I don't believe in COVID I think the measures they are taking against it is about control. No gatherings, no protests, lockdowns knock on effects.
> I wonder if the vaccine has microscopic nanobots in it, and what has Bill Gates got to do with inoculation?



Yes, you are in serious tinfoil hat territory.   

I can't add much to what NoXion has said, except to point out the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has been funding vaccination programmes in poorer counties for years, saving many lives. The foundation has also contributed funding to develop a vaccine for Covid-19, but they are not directly involved in the manufacturing and distribution of any covid vaccine, beyond some funding for poorer counties again.

The nanobots nonsense is just that, nonsense, and only believed by conspiraloons.


----------



## kropotkin (Nov 16, 2020)

panpete said:


> Call me tinfoil hat if you like.
> I won't be vaccinated, it's not that I don't believe in COVID I think the measures they are taking against it is about control. No gatherings, no protests, lockdowns knock on effects.
> I wonder if the vaccine has microscopic nanobots in it, and what has Bill Gates got to do with inoculation?


Oh please fuck off


----------



## LDC (Nov 16, 2020)

panpete said:


> Call me tinfoil hat if you like.
> I won't be vaccinated, it's not that I don't believe in COVID I think the measures they are taking against it is about control. No gatherings, no protests, lockdowns knock on effects.
> I wonder if the vaccine has microscopic nanobots in it, and what has Bill Gates got to do with inoculation?



Can I just echo the call for you to fuck off. Now on ignore, don't want to read any of your opinions.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 16, 2020)

panpete said:


> I wonder if the vaccine has microscopic nanobots in it, and what has Bill Gates got to do with inoculation?



No. Happy to help.


----------



## Cloo (Nov 16, 2020)

The thing is about these conspiracies is if you wanted to create mass control there would be far easier, cheaper ways of doing it than engineering a virus/making up a virus that tanks your economy and totally fucks up everyone's lives. I mean, I bet if you said 'If you will upload an app your phone where the government tracks your every move, you can be in with a chance of winning £1000 every week'  and gave one person using it £1000 each week, you'd have mass surveillance without fucking up your economy and society - voila!


----------



## IC3D (Nov 16, 2020)

Mass servailence exists when govt policy's are leaked then tweaked based on twitter reactions and corporations keep tabs on our spending and online discussions. It's clichéd even to say it. It's banal in its insidious nature.
Oh and the covid vaccine definately has nanobot Bill Gates in it.


----------



## 2hats (Nov 16, 2020)

Cloo said:


> The thing is about these conspiracies is if you wanted to create mass control there would be far easier, cheaper ways of doing it than engineering a virus/making up a virus that tanks your economy and totally fucks up everyone's lives.


'I worry about mass surveillance and control', say people who have voluntarily decided to carry around a small device that is locatable 24/7 and upon which is a medium they obsessively use which communicates all manner of ill-conceived, half-baked ideas, some with the intent of nudging or outright manipulation, many planted in their heads by dubious groups, corporate interests and unaccountable government actors, if not the randomly unhinged.


----------



## Cloo (Nov 16, 2020)

Yes, funny how people never question the nebulous, shadowy organisations they get their ideas from about how the world is manipulated by nebulous,  shadowy organisations.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 16, 2020)

Cloo said:


> Yes, funny how people never question the nebulous, shadowy organisations they get their ideas from about how the world is manipulated by nebulous,  shadowy organisations.



Yeah but that's a conspiracy not a (((conspiracy)))


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2020)

panpete said:


> Call me tinfoil hat if you like.
> I won't be vaccinated, it's not that I don't believe in COVID I think the measures they are taking against it is about control. No gatherings, no protests, lockdowns knock on effects.
> I wonder if the vaccine has microscopic nanobots in it, and what has Bill Gates got to do with inoculation?


One thing to think about: we've had the accusation before that other vaccines have been used to inject nanobots or other forms of control. Equally, quite large numbers of people, as in tens of thousands, have received Covid vaccines as part of drug trials. Where is the evidence of these nanobots? Presumably it would be quite easy to display them under a simple microscope? Where is the evidence of all this hardware interacting with our organs?

I'm not really having a go, others have done that.  But I do wonder what happens to your theory when you ask a simple question of it, as above?
Fwiw, even though I'll be having the vaccine as soon as offered, I do have mild anxieties. That is anxieties about something developed at the speed of light, along with the usual distrust of big corporations. It's just in the circumstances the benefits _massively _outweigh the risks, both for me and society.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 16, 2020)

Just being announced. Nearly 95% effective.
Guardian article deleted because of errors in script.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2020)

Sprocket. said:


> Just being announced. 95% effective.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's going to be fucking expensive!



> But at £38 to £45 for a course of two shots, Moderna’s vaccine is more expensive than the other frontrunners. AstraZeneca and Oxford University are aiming to sell their vaccine at about £3 a dose, while vaccines in trial with Johnson and Johnson and a collaboration between Sanofi and GSK are both expected to cost about £8 per dose. Pfizer is charging the US about £30 for a two-shot course. The UK has ordered 40m Pfizer shots but none of the Moderna vaccine.


----------



## Supine (Nov 16, 2020)

Sprocket. said:


> Just being announced. 95% effective.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Blimey. Of the patients in the study sample only 5 had the active dose. Not sure you can rely on the results quite yet!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2020)

Supine said:


> Blimey. Of the patients in the study sample only 5 had the active dose. Not sure you can rely on the results quite yet!



No, 95 patients ended-up with covid, 90 had the placebo, 5 had the vaccine.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 16, 2020)

Supine said:


> Blimey. Of the patients in the study sample only 5 had the active dose. Not sure you can rely on the results quite yet!


The Guardian story is erroneous, the news channels are stating. 15,000 participants received placebo, 90 got sick.
15,000 received vaccine, 5 got sick.
Moderna: Covid vaccine shows nearly 95% protection Moderna: Covid vaccine shows nearly 95% protection


----------



## Supine (Nov 16, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> No, 95 patients ended-up with covid, 90 had the placebo, 5 had the vaccine.



Oh yeah 

This hangover is never gonna shift!


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 16, 2020)

Vaccines don’t save lives. Vaccination saves lives.
I won’t get one anyway!


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 16, 2020)

Sprocket. said:


> Vaccines don’t save lives. Vaccination saves lives.
> I won’t get one anyway!


Why?


----------



## prunus (Nov 16, 2020)

Sprocket. said:


> This Guardian story is erroneous, the news channels are stating. 15,000 participants received placebo, 90 got sick.
> 15,000 received vaccine, 5 got sick.
> Moderna: Covid vaccine shows nearly 95% protection Moderna: Covid vaccine shows nearly 95% protection



Sorry - ignore - confused... 



Spoiler



This bit doesn’t quite stack up?



> The analysis was based on the first 95 to develop Covid-19 symptoms.
> *Only five of the Covid cases were in people given the vaccine*, 90 were in those given the dummy treatment. The company says the vaccine is protecting 94.5%.
> *The data also shows there were 11 cases of severe Covid in the trial, but none happened in people who were immunised*.


----------



## two sheds (Nov 16, 2020)

I've got the flu vaccine on Wednesday - if they were going to be putting nanobots anywhere they'd be putting them in that. 

I'll report back.


----------



## Supine (Nov 16, 2020)

two sheds said:


> I've got the flu vaccine on Wednesday - if they were going to be putting nanobots anywhere they'd be putting them in that.
> 
> I'll report back.



I work at a vaccine manufacturer at the moment. I haven't seen any containers with 'secret nanobot ingredient' written on them.


----------



## two sheds (Nov 16, 2020)

You want to have some labels printed up.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 16, 2020)

prunus said:


> This bit doesn’t quite stack up?


Yes the guardian article has mistakes compared to other news outlets. I will delete it!


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 16, 2020)

frogwoman said:


> Why?


Because I have a compromised immune system at the moment.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 16, 2020)

Fair enough. Hopefully you can get some advice on whether to take it when it does come out for general use


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2020)

Sprocket. said:


> Yes the guardian article has mistakes compared to other news outlets. I will delete it!



The wording wasn't great, but I wouldn't say it had mistakes.



> *An interim analysis released on Monday, and based on 95 patients with confirmed Covid infections*, found the candidate vaccine has an efficacy of 94.5%. The company said it now plans to apply to the US regulator, the Food and Drug Administration, for emergency-use authorisation in the coming weeks. *In the analysis, 90 of the patients received the placebo with the remaining five the vaccine.*


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Nov 16, 2020)

prunus said:


> This bit doesn’t quite stack up?



It does I think. 95 people developed Covid of which 90 had the placebo and 5 had the vaccine. Of those 11 developed severe Covid of which all had the placebo - none of the severe cases had had the vaccine.


----------



## prunus (Nov 16, 2020)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> It does I think. 95 people developed Covid of which 90 had the placebo and 5 had the vaccine. Of those 11 developed severe Covid of which all had the placebo - none of the severe cases had had the vaccine.



Yes I re-read and realised I'd got confused, sorry.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 16, 2020)

I've long suspected that urban75 transmits nanobots into my brain from my computer monitor, and is ultimately controlled by Steve Jobs, who the media claims is no longer alive. It would explain why I am still using a mac even though it costs something like £20,000 to buy some wheels for it, and why I find myself spending time from my finite lifespan arguing with people in these forums when there seems to be no discernable benefit in doing so. No one has specifically demonstrated to me that this is not going on, or even claimed that they can. Obviously, those who work amongst the servers are not going to admit that they have containers marked "secret nanobots" or the means to insert them into the cables.


----------



## weltweit (Nov 16, 2020)

I see already mentioned.

2nd vaccine, Moderna, 94.5% efficacy.

Am I right thinking I heard this requires less of a cold chain?


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2020)

__





						Latest vaccine success is good news but high price may restrict access | Coronavirus | The Guardian
					

Moderna results show Pfizer success was not flash in the pan, but poorer countries may have to look elsewhere




					amp.theguardian.com
				




Might have been posted but 'price' mentioned again


----------



## weltweit (Nov 16, 2020)

MRNA, storage / transport requirements -20C Standard Freezer, then up to 30 days in a fridge.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2020)




----------



## Cloo (Nov 16, 2020)

It will be fascinating to see how the differences between vaccines play out - eg cost, transportability.

By the way, this may be a naive question, but I honestly don't know the answer - once there are vaccines approved and available, is there anything to prevent private providers from supplying them for a fee at purchasers' convenience? I'm sure plenty of even vaguely affluent people would be happy to pay large sums to have them 6 months ahead of everyone else.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 16, 2020)

Cloo said:


> By the way, this may be a naive question, but I honestly don't know the answer - once there are vaccines approved and available, is there anything to prevent private providers from supplying them for a fee at purchasers' convenience? I'm sure plenty of even vaguely affluent people would be happy to pay large sums to have them 6 months ahead of everyone else.



Yes , I was thinking abut this the other day.  I imagine proof of vaccination might be enough to allow entry into some countries without having to isolate for 2 weeks.  If this is the case then people will certainly want to jump the queue.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2020)

Cloo said:


> It will be fascinating to see how the differences between vaccines play out - eg cost, transportability.
> 
> By the way, this may be a naive question, but I honestly don't know the answer - once there are vaccines approved and available, is there anything to prevent private providers from supplying them for a fee at purchasers' convenience? I'm sure plenty of even vaguely affluent people would be happy to pay large sums to have them 6 months ahead of everyone else.



There will be no private vaccination for a long time.



> The Government has insisted there will be no queue-jumping for a Covid-19 vaccine and “every single person in the UK” will be offered one for free on the NHS before any private providers will even have a product to sell, *i* can reveal.
> 
> A ministerial source at the Department of Health said that while private healthcare providers are permitted to source vaccines from manufacturers such as BioNTech/Pfizer and Astrazeneca/Oxford, any orders intended for sale to their customers will be put “at the back of the queue” and not delivered until the UK Government has received all of its orders.











						No 'queue-jumping' for private healthcare providers over Covid-19 vaccine
					

Those in lower-priority groups could face a long wait for the vaccine, and private patients will not be able to pay to get it early




					inews.co.uk


----------



## prunus (Nov 16, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> There will be no private vaccination for a long time.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



In this country, maybe, but I’m sure there will be a thriving trade in packages Switzerland or somewhere where for a few thousand pounds you can get done.


----------



## Cloo (Nov 16, 2020)

Makes sense cupid_stunt as governments really should have priority

prunus- also agree money will find loopholes


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2020)

Cloo said:


> It will be fascinating to see how the differences between vaccines play out - eg cost, transportability.


Yes. Whether and at what point in the process anything like a free market starts to operate will be interesting. Everything is so up in the air and will depend on whether the various vaccines work and for how long.  The various companies want to 'win' in this process and some will be better placed than others. But equally, the last thing they want is a free market with downward pressure on prices say in 12 months when/if the virus comes under some degree of control.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2020)

prunus said:


> In this country, maybe, but I’m sure there will be a thriving trade in packages Switzerland or somewhere where for a few thousand pounds you can get done.



Not sure about that, governments from around the world have put in massive pre-orders with the various drug companies, why would they piddle around with what would be tiny orders in comparison, from the private sector, until the pre-orders have been delivered?


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 16, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Not sure about that, governments from around the world have put in massive pre-orders with the various drug companies, why would they piddle around with what would be tiny orders in comparison, from the private sector, until the pre-orders have been delivered?



Because their margin will be much higher when selling private.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> Because their margin will be much higher when selling private.



Yes, but the orders would be tiny, so the extra return will not be great, and certainly not worth pissing off the governments that had already placed orders


----------



## IC3D (Nov 16, 2020)

I'm sure these will be discretely for sale in the UK  soon too.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Not sure about that, governments from around the world have put in massive pre-orders with the various drug companies, why would they piddle around with what would be tiny orders in comparison, from the private sector, until the pre-orders have been delivered?


Know what you mean about mega bulk orders being where it's at. Same time, it's a guarantee that various private clinics are at this moment working on how they can get their hands on the vaccine(s), initially for the super rich and then the merely 'rich'. That won't be just about making profits vaccinating the elite, it will be about maintaining their position as companies who _*can *_queue jump for the elite.


----------



## two sheds (Nov 16, 2020)

Do we know how the symptoms compare for people who have had the vaccine but still contracted the virus compared with those who've not had the vaccine?


----------



## IC3D (Nov 16, 2020)

Presumably China will just clone it and produce their own then sell it in the grey msrket


----------



## bimble (Nov 16, 2020)

Old article but one of a few that came up when i googled just now thinking what happens next when all the countries with money are vying with eachother to buy these vaccines up.
It basically suggests that if you live in a poor country you might have to wait until 2024 before you get a chance of being vaccinated, once they are no longer the hot thing on the market.
Rich states' Covid deals 'may deprive poor of vaccine for years'

World bank has been anticipating the issue with a 12 billion pot  for this but no idea what that looks like in relation to actual costs.
Likewise this, COVAX, a sort of collaborative effort where rich countries give some spare change to help make distribution more equitable, has raised 2bn so far.
So i suppose people will still be dealing with this in poor countries when we've all forgotten about the whole thing.


----------



## ignatious (Nov 16, 2020)

two sheds said:


> Do we know how the symptoms compare for people who have had the vaccine but still contracted the virus compared with those who've not had the vaccine?


The moderna one had no serious cases, the Zeneca one didn’t provide any info.

Similarly, nothing about age groups on either.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2020)

two sheds said:


> I've got the flu vaccine on Wednesday - if they were going to be putting nanobots anywhere they'd be putting them in that.
> 
> I'll report back.


I'm having a Zoom piss up tonight - are there are any nano lads that can sort out a hangover?  If so, I for one welcome my Tiny Overlords (Innerlords? Sanguinary Lords? Capilliary Captains? Aortic Overseers? Plasmic Presidents? Plateletic Premiers?).


----------



## two sheds (Nov 16, 2020)

I bet the little fuckers run Vista


----------



## prunus (Nov 16, 2020)

two sheds said:


> I bet the little fuckers run Vista



Would have to be cross-compiled for Arm.


----------



## two sheds (Nov 16, 2020)

I want Linux :grrr:


but a bit of a diversion - back to vaccines eh?


----------



## NoXion (Nov 16, 2020)

Maybe the vaccines should come with a warning label:


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 16, 2020)

Had this text from my GP - looks like they're testing the waters.  



I replied Yes obviously.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 16, 2020)

To be fair they should have couched those questions as

Y) are you sane?
N) are you batshit crazy?
U) are you hungover and this question is too difficult at the moment?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2020)

farmerbarleymow said:


> Had this text from my GP - looks like they're testing the waters.
> 
> View attachment 239143
> 
> I replied Yes obviously.


Interesting. That seems like a blunt instrument - y/n/u - it's almost as if they are encouraging a strong U vote.


----------



## LDC (Nov 16, 2020)

It's also totally going to reinforce the idea that the vaccine is just round the corner for everyone.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 16, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Interesting. That seems like a blunt instrument - y/n/u - it's almost as if they are encouraging a strong U vote.


Useful for them to understand how many loons they have on the practice list I suppose.  In the catchment area for the local trust there has been a lot of deaths - highest in the area - so hopefully people aren't that stupid, but sadly I doubt that.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 16, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> It's also totally going to reinforce the idea that the vaccine is just round the corner for everyone.


Yeah, the messaging isn't great.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> It's also totally going to reinforce the idea that the vaccine is just round the corner for everyone.


Desperate people making Christmas plans and struggling businesses pushing to reopen.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2020)

Suppose it's (just about) fair enough for individual GPs to test the waters, but doing this doesn't fit into any kind of sensible NHS wide strategy, particularly given the extent of conspiraloonery that's around. And as LDC said, even sillier as we are miles away from mass vaccination.


----------



## LDC (Nov 16, 2020)

Yeah, actually I'd go a bit further and think it's an irresponsible thing for a GP surgery to be sending out.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Yeah, actually I'd go a bit further and think it's an irresponsible thing for a GP surgery to be sending out.


Yup


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 16, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Yeah, actually I'd go a bit further and think it's an irresponsible thing for a GP surgery to be sending out.


That's why I cropped out the surgery name - they probably meant well but in comms terms possibly not the best strategy.


----------



## xenon (Nov 16, 2020)

One thing I wonder, since no one knows yet how long vaccine derived immunity lasts, hopefully a lot longer than 6 months. But if you're not in an at risk group and won't be getting one any time soon due to age, couldn't this effectively mean you never get one as by the time they've gone through everyone ahead of you, it will be time to re-vaccinate them again.

So you lot under 50, with no underlying health conditions making you especially vunrible, you're probably just gonna catch it at some point and acquire what natural immunity that may bring.

Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not begrudging being under 50 and sans a serious health condition (AFAIK.) Just pondering.


----------



## Cloo (Nov 17, 2020)

I do wonder about that - older people being more a priority might need a second dose before I can get my first and I'm OK with that.

Quite amused with some people I've seen online being all pissed off that 'old people will get to go out and do stuff' first but I don't think it will work quite like that!


----------



## LDC (Nov 17, 2020)

Cloo said:


> I do wonder about that - older people being more a priority might need a second dose before I can get my first and I'm OK with that.
> 
> Quite amused with some people I've seen online being all pissed off that 'old people will get to go out and do stuff' first but I don't think it will work quite like that!



Those old people, living so long and then stealing our vaccines so they can go out raving and to the bingo. <shakes fist>


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 17, 2020)

Interesting, detailed and broadly positive Guardian article (from today) about the latest with the Oxford/AstraZeneca research.




			
				Guardian headline said:
			
		

> *Moderna vaccine trial's results bode well for Oxford/AstraZeneca jab*
> *Phase 3 efficacy rate of nearly 95% for US firm’s treatment is promising for UK vaccine trial*



Includes a cool table  comparing -- very simply -- all the latest on various vaccine research projects -- under this headline
*Most promising vaccines in development*
in the middle of the article.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 17, 2020)

From page 16 of this thread :


ignatious said:


> The moderna one had no serious cases, *the Zeneca one didn’t provide any info.*



Not sure what you meant there ignatious ? 

The article about the Cxford/AstraZeneca research that I posted above, makes it fairly clear that we still await (imminent, most likely  ) announcements from Oxford about their preliminary results.

They appear to be confident in Oxford, but they haven't actually released any data/stats yet.

Expected ahead of Xmas I think


----------



## two sheds (Nov 17, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Those old people, living so long and then stealing our vaccines so they can go out raving and to the bingo. <shakes fist>



Given half a chance


----------



## 8ball (Nov 17, 2020)

Out of interest, I just took a look at the Pfizer protocol and details - current  primary endpoint is how many infections occur a week after the second dose, and further analyses are on the way (a lot of people obv got jabbed a while back, but they batch the analysis once they have the numbers necessary to reach a degree of confidence as per original plans - this bit is pretty important in terms of justified concern about things like cooking up an analysis that is designed to flatter the results).

The pessimist in me is bracing for disappointment in the longer term, am hoping it's just paranoia.  But safety-wise - nearly 40,000 people have had both doses and no serious adverse events at this point (the main worry is neurological issues, which tend to emerge quite quickly).

And... it seems to work for at least a week.  So happy days.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 18, 2020)

The number of people saying they will get vaccinated is dropping, which is worrying.   

The UK figures are bad enough, but it's even worst across the pond and with our neighbours. 



> In findings that suggest Boris Johnson’s government faces a huge challenge in managing a widespread roll-out, only 43 per cent of Britons said they were sure they would get vaccinated if eligible – down from 50 per cent in June. Another 32 per cent of people in the UK said they would “probably” be willing to get the vaccine, down four points since the summer.
> 
> Scepticism has risen even higher in the US and parts of western Europe. The proportion of Americans saying they would definitely take a vaccine has fallen from 47 per cent in June to just 30 per cent today.
> 
> Only 21 per cent of French citizens said they would definitely take a vaccine, while 35 per cent of Germans and 38 per cent of Italians said they were definite about vaccination if eligible – with all three countries seeing falls in enthusiasm since June.











						Distrust of government leading to ‘alarming’ vaccine scepticism, poll finds
					

Politicians around the world face ‘huge task’ in building up trust for roll-out, says pollster




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## ignatious (Nov 18, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> From page 16 of this thread :
> 
> 
> Not sure what you meant there ignatious ?
> ...


Ah, I meant to say Pfizer, not Zeneca.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 18, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> The number of people saying they will get vaccinated is dropping, which is worrying.
> 
> The UK figures are bad enough, but it's even worst across the pond and with our neighbours.
> 
> ...



Yeah its a bit worrying but I'm fairly relaxed about it at the moment.  As was discussed on another thread uptake of the vaccine will likely be linked to lots of other things which could be grouped together under a title of 'back to normal'.

I think a lot of people will soon come around to the idea of vaccination if their summer holiday depends on it.  Or when there are other big drivers like for instance:

We can only have full sports stadia when the countries vaccination levels reach ??%
We can only have live music and other performance arts fully normal 
Places of worship can be singing and whatevs when the country reaches the percentage 
We can only allow large family gatherings etc
etc etc

There are things that can be a strict prohibition like you're not allowed in to a country with a certificate of vaccination (like yellow fever is now).  Then there can be certain other measures which could be described as nudge and are based around carrot rather than stick.  

Whilst there will remain a number of loud and shouty people rejecting the vaccine and below that will be a lot of worriers who are happy for others to do the heavy lifting initially, I think the desire for normality will largely overcome this.  Obvs this is me just guessing but as with everything with the virus we are in unchartered waters.

The big unknown in all this is how badly the government fucks up the roll out.  If they continue as they have in their visible from space levels of corruption then that could seriously damage uptake.


----------



## Cloo (Nov 18, 2020)

We have our daughter's bat mitzvah moved to next summer - before last lockdown they'd just got it to having bar/bat mitzvahs with up to 20 guests (with a max 30-40 in the room) with masks and no singing other than service leaders, and a shortened service. I expect by end next June, that number will have increased, but masks may still be in play and it still won't be capacity, and service may remain truncated. So not normality, but improved.

I'm expecting to make it to Slovakia for summer, on the basis that if people could go there this summer (and they did), we'll be able to make it there next year.

I also worry that this government will cock up rollout, especially on top of Christmas possibly setting us back by months as I fully expect tens of millions to travel/go to people's houses over Xmas regardless of any restructions and Jan/Feb to have the potential to be the worst peak yet.


----------



## magneze (Nov 18, 2020)

Pfizer now says their vaccine is in fact 95% effective, rather than 90% as of last week. Probably worth pointing out at this stage that it looks like the pharmaceutical companies are engaging in a PR war here.

So Pfizer said 90% last week so they could be first. Then Moderna says theirs is 95% effective. Now Pfizer says after 'more tests' theirs is in fact 95% effective.

I'm not sure this really helps confidence does it?


----------



## Supine (Nov 18, 2020)

The numbers that matter are the final submission numbers. Time will tell who wins that one.


----------



## magneze (Nov 18, 2020)

Indeed, I heard today that other countries are making much less noise about the vaccines. Probably a better approach overall rather than the pharmaceutical adverts masquerading as news.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 18, 2020)

magneze said:


> Pfizer now says their vaccine is in fact 95% effective, rather than 90% as of last week. Probably worth pointing out at this stage that it looks like the pharmaceutical companies are engaging in a PR war here.
> 
> So Pfizer said 90% last week so they could be first. Then Moderna says theirs is 95% effective. Now Pfizer says after 'more tests' theirs is in fact 95% effective.
> 
> I'm not sure this really helps confidence does it?



They have just updated the data, last week's 90% figures was based on 94 confirmed Covid-19 infections among the trial’s 43,538 participant, whereas this week's final analysis it's based on 170 cases, and luckily that has shown it's more effective, it could easily have gone the other way.



> Pfizer said there had been 170 cases of the disease in its trial of more 43,000 volunteers, of which 162 were observed in the placebo arm and 8 were in the vaccine group.











						Pfizer coronavirus vaccine 95 per cent effective and 'could be used within days'
					

Pfizer has revealed that its vaccine is 95% effective, adding it had the required two-months of safety data and would apply for emergency U.S. authorisation within days




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Nov 18, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> Yeah its a bit worrying but I'm fairly relaxed about it at the moment.  As was discussed on another thread uptake of the vaccine will likely be linked to lots of other things which could be grouped together under a title of 'back to normal'.
> 
> I think a lot of people will soon come around to the idea of vaccination if their summer holiday depends on it.  Or when there are other big drivers like for instance:
> 
> ...



Yeah I think a lot of this is just down to the usual ways you can get all sorts of weird answers in surveys. If the question is just 'will you take a vaccine' then you've got a hypothetical scenario with an uncertain risk for an uncertain reward. It's not surprising if a lot of people aren't going for a definite yes there. 

When things are a bit more concrete and the vaccine(s) are hopefully offering a route out of the whole situation and some sort of path back to normality, I think take up will be a lot higher.


----------



## Supine (Nov 18, 2020)

CEPI are setting up a taskforce to monitor new covid strains to determine vaccine effectiveness  









						CEPI creates new collaborative taskforce to assess impact of emerging viral strains on effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines – CEPI
					

CEPI and partners will work to further strengthen real-time global tracking and testing of SARS-CoV-2 sequences.




					cepi.net


----------



## Sunray (Nov 18, 2020)

Vaccines have ended the problems of polio (99.99% eradication) and smallpox (eradicated in 1975) and more recently Ebola while not eradicated, the vaccine has been shown to be 90% effective for a disease which horribly kills 80% of the people who catch it.

I think the new vaccines for C-19 can end the pandemic too.  So many vaccines are in the works, it's amazing what can be achieved in so little time.
If it all goes well, which I have no reason to doubt, we will be back to complaining about the weather in 2022.


----------



## Epona (Nov 18, 2020)

Cloo said:


> We have our daughter's bat mitzvah moved to next summer - before last lockdown they'd just got it to having bar/bat mitzvahs with up to 20 guests (with a max 30-40 in the room) with masks and no singing other than service leaders, and a shortened service. I expect by end next June, that number will have increased, but masks may still be in play and it still won't be capacity, and service may remain truncated. So not normality, but improved.
> 
> I'm expecting to make it to Slovakia for summer, on the basis that if people could go there this summer (and they did), we'll be able to make it there next year.
> 
> I also worry that this government will cock up rollout, especially on top of Christmas possibly setting us back by months as I fully expect tens of millions to travel/go to people's houses over Xmas regardless of any restructions and Jan/Feb to have the potential to be the worst peak yet.



A bit off topic, but how on earth is your daughter growing up already, it seems only yesterday you were looking forward to her arrival!!!  _Feeling old_


----------



## two sheds (Nov 18, 2020)

Sunray said:


> Vaccines have ended the problems of polio (99.99% eradication) and smallpox (eradicated in 1975) and more recently Ebola while not eradicated, the vaccine has been shown to be 90% effective for a disease which horribly kills 80% of the people who catch it.
> 
> I think the new vaccines for C-19 can end the pandemic too.  So many vaccines are in the works, it's amazing what can be achieved in so little time.
> If it all goes well, which I have no reason to doubt, we will be back to complaining about the weather in 2022.



Have you looked out of the window today?  Bloody rain again.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2020)

Covid vaccines should not be seen as 'unicorn' solution, says WHO chief – video
					

The warning comes after positive efficacy results from late-stage trials of two potential Covid-19 vaccines




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2020)

Thread


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 19, 2020)

I really want to read those two links, but I'm late for work already 

I will definitely prioritise them later though -- like a fair few people on here I suspect, I'm doing my best to keep up with vaccine news and discussion. 
It's fascinating stuff


----------



## weltweit (Nov 19, 2020)

I heard a piece on R4 this morning about the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine which is apparently likely to be able to be transported and stored at much more normal temperatures which will enable vaccinations around the world in places that don't have cold chain distribution systems.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 19, 2020)

weltweit said:


> I heard a piece on R4 this morning about the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine which is apparently likely to be able to be transported and stored at much more normal temperatures which will enable vaccinations around the world in places that don't have cold chain distribution systems.



Yeah and its much much cheaper.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 19, 2020)

Some more good news about the Oxford vaccine.



> Phase 2 data published in the Lancet suggests one of the groups most vulnerable to serious illness and death from Covid-19 could build immunity, researchers say.
> 
> According to the researchers, the trial demonstrated similar immune responses across all three age groups – 18-55, 56-69, and 70 and over.
> 
> The study of 560 healthy adults, including 240 over the age of 70, found that the vaccine is better tolerated in older people than in younger adults.











						Oxford Covid vaccine could build immunity in older people – study
					

Phase 2 trial data shows strong immune response in over-70s and better tolerance in older adults




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Supine (Nov 20, 2020)

Fantastic news - Pfizer have submitted to the FDA. I think it is already on a rolling assessment by EMA and the gov have asked the MHRA to assess it. 

They were going to anyway but Hancock wants to sound like he plays a part in the process. 









						Covid vaccine: Pfizer applies for first approval in US
					

The vaccine could get emergency authorisation in the first two weeks of December.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Cloo (Nov 20, 2020)

Badgers said:


> Thread



I've always thought in this that it's not that vaccines cannot possibly be safe without a decade of development, it's just that's how long it happens to take when you don't have societal shutdown as a motivator. It's not the case that time = safety, it's just that this time we have the will and the funding, as that Tweeter says.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 21, 2020)

Sprocket. said:


> Vaccines don’t save lives. Vaccinations save lives.
> I won’t get one anyway!



Though this looks promising, I hope so anyhow.

Covid: Jab for people who cannot be vaccinated trialled Covid: Jab for people who cannot be vaccinated trialled


----------



## Cloo (Nov 21, 2020)

I think this is probably a realistic outlook on what vaccinating a nation will mean in practice:



There's no 'moment of freedom', but people will be able to start sitting in cinemas, theatres or restaurants, distanced and/or masked and know that those measures are a precaution, not the only thing between you and infection/infecting others, which I think will feel very different and less anxiety inducing.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 21, 2020)

I thought that in the case of eg flu jabs it stopped you from carrying the virus and unwittingly infecting people?


----------



## 2hats (Nov 21, 2020)

Cloo said:


> There's no 'moment of freedom', but people will be able to start sitting in cinemas, theatres or restaurants, distanced and/or masked and know that those measures are a precaution, not the only thing between you and infection/infecting others, which I think will feel very different and less anxiety inducing.


Don't bet on the first vaccines to prevent you from infecting others; masks and other mitigations will still be required.

There's no evidence thus far that the leading (mRNA) vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna), in advanced trials, provide any sterilising immunity, only immunity from developing the disease, COVID-19. The third vaccine, Oxford/AstraZeneca, only appears to provoke a promising immune response thus far, which doesn't necessarily equate to even immunity from the disease - that is one of the aims of the next stage of their trial (it probably will, but is yet to be confirmed).

None of the vaccine studies are even yet to look at sterilising immunity (the ability to avoid infection and transmit the virus onwards). Most animal models don't suggest many of the vaccines (tested thus so far) will provide sterilising immunity and that's a not entirely unexpected outcome for intramuscular delivery.

Intranasal vaccines, which might come into play much later next year, may well prevent upper and lower respiratory tract infection and thus greatly reduce viral shedding in (what appears to be) the key infectious stage (some have already demonstrated this in primate models). This delivery mode may also only need one dose rather than a second booster, thus potentially improving uptake and reducing community spread more readily than intramuscular.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 21, 2020)

Dont flu vaccines stop you from transmitting the flu virus 2hats? A mate of mine who has a compromised immune system is very keen that people should get it for this reason.


----------



## 2hats (Nov 22, 2020)

Intramuscular (inactivated) probably, largely don't - they are, so I understand, mainly designed to reduce morbidity (and largely measured against that). More recent (live, attenuated) intranasal ones show promising signs of promoting sterilising immunity (through IgA and T cell responses - which may well prove a fruitful approach for SARS-CoV-2 as well). Influenza viral release mechanics have only recently become well understood.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 23, 2020)

2hats said:


> Intranasal vaccines, which might come into play much later next year, may well prevent upper and lower respiratory tract infection and thus greatly reduce viral shedding in (what appears to be) the key infectious stage (some have already demonstrated this in primate models). This delivery mode may also only need one dose rather than a second booster, thus potentially improving uptake and reducing community spread more readily than intramuscular.



A fair bit more on the good potential for intranasal vaccines here, in this detailed article in yesterday's Observer by the consistently excellent (IMO!) Laura Spinney :




			
				Observer headline said:
			
		

> *Why the race to find Covid-19 vaccines is far from over*
> 
> *Despite the promising news from Pfizer and Moderna, other efforts – which may be even more effective – continue around the world*


There's plenty of other related discussion on immune responses and so forth in the article, good detailed science. Well worth  a read -- it's a fairly long article, but worth the time I think


----------



## Supine (Nov 23, 2020)

Breaking news









						Covid-19: Oxford University vaccine is highly effective
					

The vaccine is cheaper than other options and easier to distribute around the world.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## prunus (Nov 23, 2020)

Supine said:


> Breaking news
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Interesting. I hope they can validate the low dose/high dose 90% efficacy suggestion in the data.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 23, 2020)

Supine said:


> Breaking news
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't understand why the BBC is going with the 70% as its headline, when one low & one high does seems to produce 90% protection. 









						COVID-19: Oxford vaccine is up to 90% effective in preventing coronavirus, tests show
					

The vaccine, codenamed AZD1222, was developed at Oxford University with support from the pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca.




					news.sky.com


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Nov 23, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> I don't understand why the BBC is going with the 70% as its headline, when one low & one high does seems to produce 90% protection.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I guess the low/high dose group isn't big enough for them to be confident with the figures.


----------



## prunus (Nov 23, 2020)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> I guess the low/high dose group isn't big enough for them to be confident with the figures.



Yes, it’s described as a “suggestion” in the data by one of the scientists from the study, which is (ime) scientist-speak for “a long way from statistically significant.” (It can also mean “our study wasn’t designed in such a way as to address this question however if you were to manipulate the data in a certain way it could show” though that seems unlikely in this context.)

E2a: anyone found a link to the underlying data and/or study rather than press reports?


----------



## prunus (Nov 23, 2020)

Some more good news in the detail: no hospitalisations (or severe cases) in the vaccinated population (regardless of dosing regime) (caveat: only 131 cases in total so not a huge sample); seemingly more efficacious dosing regime also appears to show reduction in asymptomatic cases (and hence asymptomatic transmission) (again I don’t think necessarily enough data to say for sure yet).


----------



## Combustible (Nov 23, 2020)

prunus said:


> E2a: anyone found a link to the underlying data and/or study rather than press reports?


I'm not sure any data has been released yet, but the press release from AstraZeneca has some more details



> One dosing regimen (n=2,741) showed vaccine efficacy of 90% when AZD1222 was given as a half dose, followed by a full dose at least one month apart, and another dosing regimen (n=8,895) showed 62% efficacy when given as two full doses at least one month apart. The combined analysis from both dosing regimens (n=11,636) resulted in an average efficacy of 70%. All results were statistically significant (p<=0.0001). More data will continue to accumulate and additional analysis will be conducted, refining the efficacy reading and establishing the duration of protection.



Obviously the slightly concerning thing is that the group with 2 full doses with 62% efficacy is about 3 times larger than the 90% efficacy group, so it could be the margin of error on the 90% estimate is much larger.






						AZD1222 vaccine met primary efficacy endpoint in preventing COVID-19
					






					www.astrazeneca.com


----------



## Supine (Nov 23, 2020)

I'm not reading anything into the 62%, 70% or 90% results to be honest. We are talking about such small amounts of data the numbers can jump lots just due to random chance. Same goes for the other two vaccines that show 90%+. 

The good news is we have another candidate and it's cheaper and more available.  

Great news for a monday morning


----------



## teuchter (Nov 23, 2020)

I hadn't appreciated that these vaccinations might have no effect on whether you are liable to infect someone else.

Doesn't this potentially create a scenario where transmission actually increases? Because those who've had the vaccine will feel that there's no longer risk to themselves, and be more likely to be out and about. And, if you are seeing fewer people suffering significant symptoms but the same number of people infected overall, that's another tranche of people who would otherwise have stayed at home, out and about.


----------



## bimble (Nov 23, 2020)

This is good. Might turn out to make a huge difference if it means that an effective vaccine will be copyright-free, might mean that there is something like an end in sight not just in rich countries.


and it only needs refrigeration at normal fridge temperatures, that is a massive advantage.


----------



## cloudyday (Nov 23, 2020)

if vaccination is required more than once (over months, years or whatever). Does anyone know if you can mix them or do you have to stick with the one you started with?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 23, 2020)

bimble said:


> This is good. Might turn out to make a huge difference if it means that an effective vaccine will be copyright-free, might mean that there is something like an end in sight not just in rich countries.
> 
> and it only needs refrigeration at normal fridge temperatures, that is a massive advantage.




Yeah, they always said it would be produced on a not-for-profit basis during the pandemic, but could still be very profitable afterwards.









						COVID-19: The multi-billion pound business of the Oxford vaccine
					

A leading researcher on the vaccine insisted it was made not-for-profit during the pandemic, but could earn millions after.




					news.sky.com


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 23, 2020)

teuchter said:


> I hadn't appreciated that these vaccinations might have no effect on whether you are liable to infect someone else.
> 
> Doesn't this potentially create a scenario where transmission actually increases? Because those who've had the vaccine will feel that there's no longer risk to themselves, and be more likely to be out and about. And, if you are seeing fewer people suffering significant symptoms but the same number of people infected overall, that's another tranche of people who would otherwise have stayed at home, out and about.



Yes there are just so many unknowns at the moment.  It seems to me the effectiveness of any vaccine in the most at risk groups is going to be critical.


----------



## ignatious (Nov 23, 2020)

teuchter said:


> I hadn't appreciated that these vaccinations might have no effect on whether you are liable to infect someone else.
> 
> Doesn't this potentially create a scenario where transmission actually increases? Because those who've had the vaccine will feel that there's no longer risk to themselves, and be more likely to be out and about. And, if you are seeing fewer people suffering significant symptoms but the same number of people infected overall, that's another tranche of people who would otherwise have stayed at home, out and about.


The vaccines that are currently being trialled are only researching their effect on symptomatic disease (defined as a cough, fever, and positive PCR test). They are not looking into hospital admissions, ICU admissions or deaths. The effect of these vaccines on death rates and person-to-person asymptomatic transmission are therefore unknown. An overview of the trials and what they are aiming to achieve can be found on page two of this BMJ article.

It is possible that transmission will actually increase if life goes ‘back to normal’. In fact it seems quite likely if transmission is still possible even by those who’ve had the vaccine, and if there are no distancing measures in place.


----------



## 2hats (Nov 23, 2020)

teuchter said:


> Doesn't this potentially create a scenario where transmission actually increases?


Another good reason (not that one is needed) for vaccinating the elderly vulnerable first, and then healthcare staff, the vulnerable and then down the age cohorts...


cloudyday said:


> if vaccination is required more than once (over months, years or whatever). Does anyone know if you can mix them or do you have to stick with the one you started with?


The research data to answer that question should be available in the next 2-5 years.


----------



## LDC (Nov 23, 2020)

cloudyday said:


> if vaccination is required more than once (over months, years or whatever). Does anyone know if you can mix them or do you have to stick with the one you started with?



Very theoretical question though, as any vaccines are going to be in short supply for a long while, so nobody is likely to be given multiple vaccines.

From my little knowledge it would depend on how each vaccine worked, and it _might_ be possible to have multiple vaccines that work in different ways, but I wouldn't have though that would be an priority area for looking into currently. I'm on a vaccine trial and have been told that I will be able to have any other vaccine that comes into use, even if I have had the vaccine rather than the placebo in the trial if that's any indicator.


----------



## prunus (Nov 23, 2020)

teuchter said:


> I hadn't appreciated that these vaccinations might have no effect on whether you are liable to infect someone else.
> 
> Doesn't this potentially create a scenario where transmission actually increases? Because those who've had the vaccine will feel that there's no longer risk to themselves, and be more likely to be out and about. And, if you are seeing fewer people suffering significant symptoms but the same number of people infected overall, that's another tranche of people who would otherwise have stayed at home, out and about.



It is possible but it’s not likely - the reason the scientists are stressing it is that in most cases the studies they are doing are not set up to test that - scientists are very precise. The differential dose arm of the OxAZ study is the only one where I’ve read that they were testing for anything like that (weekly tests of asymptomatic test subjects), and it suggested it did result in reduced transmission. 

I’d bet if you could ask any of the scientists involved informally over a beer they would answer “well we don’t know because we haven’t looked but yeah I’m pretty sure it will reduce asymptomic transmission as well, and reduce asymptomatic case number too”


----------



## 2hats (Nov 23, 2020)

The majority of vaccines don't provide sterilising immunity (or strong degree thereof). Their main (or only) aim is disease prevention - eg TB, polio, various influenza - to reduce mortality, morbidity and complications. Some vaccines happen to also provide sterilising immunity - eg HPV, MMR, yellow fever.


----------



## Sunray (Nov 23, 2020)

With three vaccines on the horizon. Especially with the Oxford Uni vaccine being stable at 4degC I really think back to normal is on the horizon. Although I read the NHS has supplied storage warehouses around the country with specialised freezers.

The UK already has 4 million doses of the Oxford vaccine already.  If/When it's approved, health care workers can start to get vaccinations immediately.


----------



## elbows (Nov 23, 2020)

I do not predict a return to 100% normality.


----------



## bimble (Nov 23, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yeah, they always said it would be produced on a not-for-profit basis during the pandemic, but could still be very profitable afterwards.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


i think this qualifies as a genuine good news item. In perpetuity is a long time.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 23, 2020)

The issue as to whether the vaccines (don't) prevent onward transmission, along with the 70% headline figure, focuses everything right back onto uptake figures and resistance by anti-vacc twats. If a significant number of people who are of working age and socialising refuse the jab, everything gets very messy and the who thing drags on and on.  Hopefully, if rational argument fails, self interest, gigs and holidays will push them towards the jab. It's going to be a bumpy ride though, with a spectacularly stupid and venal government in the driving seat.

By the by, anybody know how people will prove they've had the jab? Some kind of electronic add on to a driving licence? Phone app?


----------



## LDC (Nov 23, 2020)

Sunray said:


> With three vaccines on the horizon. Especially with the Oxford Uni vaccine being stable at 4degC I really think back to normal is on the horizon. Although I read the NHS has supplied storage warehouses around the country with specialised freezers.
> 
> The UK already has 4 million doses of the Oxford vaccine already.  If/When it's approved, health care workers can start to get vaccinations immediately.



Healthcare workers aren't first to get vaccinated. It's care home residents and workers first. Heakthcare workers next, although that might be concurrently depending on vaccine amounts that are available and the logistics of getting people actually jabbed.

When you say 'back to normal is on the horizon' if you mean some return to normality by next summer, then yes. More and sooner than that, no.


----------



## LDC (Nov 23, 2020)

Wilf said:


> By the by, anybody know how people will prove they've had the jab? Some kind of electronic add on to a driving licence? Phone app?



It'll be a bar code tattoo on the forehead according to some...

Work based OH records for the first lots getting it I expect; care home residents and workers and healthcare workers. Rest would be GP records I expect. I don't think they'll be any proving you've had the vaccine though for anything, no matter what the newspapers say. I mean shops etc. can't even make people wear masks, no way is anything commercial like gigs or other events are going to be able to check medical records and prove things like valid medical exemptions for people who can't have the vaccine.

Wonder if some workplaces will make it compulsory? Healthcare and care homes could for staff for example.


----------



## belboid (Nov 23, 2020)

Supine said:


> Breaking news
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No need to thank me for saving the world 

or 70% of it anyway


----------



## belboid (Nov 23, 2020)

I am intrigued to know what I’ll be allowed to take - as I’ve been doing the Oxford trial since it started.  I am meant to be on it for a year, so at least till next April, I can’t actually remember when I started it.   I dont actually know if I had the vaccine or placebo (obvs) and they do need to continue studies to see if there are any longer term effects.  But I’ll be pissed off if I can’t go on holiday/to gigs because I can’t provide proof I’ve been vaccinated.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 23, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Wonder if some workplaces will make it compulsory? Healthcare and care homes could for staff for example.



Its an interesting thought.  A breakout in our factory is what scares our MD the most.  

Flights would be the one place where I think where some sort of vaccine certificate may be used.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 23, 2020)

2hats said:


> The majority of vaccines don't provide sterilising immunity (or strong degree thereof). Their main (or only) aim is disease prevention - eg TB, polio, various influenza - to reduce mortality, morbidity and complications.


Now I'm confused because I'd understood that polio eradication is a result of vaccination reducing its opportunities for transmission.


----------



## elbows (Nov 23, 2020)

By the way I would consider the mink strain scare as being something of a preview of one possible future scenario where vaccination leads to selection pressure when it comes to how the virus evolves. ie strains that randomly mutate in a way that just happens to bypass the immune responses generated by initial vaccines will end up with a big advantage that leads to them becoming the dominant strain.

I dont think such a scenario is completely inevitable but in theory its a real risk and it will be an area of concern in the covid vaccine era.


----------



## 2hats (Nov 23, 2020)

teuchter said:


> Now I'm confused because I'd understood that polio eradication is a result of vaccination reducing its opportunities for transmission.


Polio has not entirely been eradicated; there are still routes/incidences of transmission. Indeed the polio vaccination programme takes advantage of some degree of transmission in order to help promote community immunity.

There are two types of polio vaccine in use:

Sabin (oral) - attenuated live virus.
Salk (intramuscular) - inactivated.
The former vaccine does promote sterilising immunity (as well as immunity from disease and, almost uniquely, contact immunity); however it can occasionally promote vaccine derived poliovirus strains and poliomyelitis itself. The latter vaccine only provides immunity from disease (but with no risk of either promoting vaccine derived poliovirus strains or poliomyelitis).

More generally - attenuated live virus based vaccines tend to promote both sterilising immunity, because the immune system of the patient experiences something akin to the full infection cycle, and tend to be longer lasting as a result (many years to lifetime). Also, in part, because they tend to be ones that are administered orally/nasally.


----------



## Sunray (Nov 23, 2020)

elbows said:


> I do not predict a return to 100% normality.



Your reasoning?   If the vaccine works and doesn't make us sick, the pandemic ends. We can do all the things we were doing.  
Vaccinate rapidly enough and it also ends the virus, no hosts so it can't replicate. 

We can genuinely wave goodbye to Covid-19, maybe figure out how to respond to pandemics in the future.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 23, 2020)

As people can get reinfected I'm guessing we will need to get vaccinated every year or so


----------



## editor (Nov 23, 2020)

frogwoman said:


> As people can get reinfected I'm guessing we will need to get vaccinated every year or so


That would be a small price to pay, all things considered.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 23, 2020)

I'm guessing we'll get letters saying when it is due etc. I don't think I've ever looked forward to an injection so much


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 23, 2020)

Vaccinated Siberian Medics Get Coronavirus - The Moscow Times
					

At least three medics who received Russia’s vaunted Sputnik V vaccine have contracted the coronavirus in Siberia as part of a vaccination drive of at-risk groups, regional authorities said Tuesday.




					www.themoscowtimes.com
				




 really hope this is a once-off


----------



## weltweit (Nov 23, 2020)

I heard AstraZeneca plan to distribute their vaccine at cost.


----------



## prunus (Nov 23, 2020)

frogwoman said:


> Vaccinated Siberian Medics Get Coronavirus - The Moscow Times
> 
> 
> At least three medics who received Russia’s vaunted Sputnik V vaccine have contracted the coronavirus in Siberia as part of a vaccination drive of at-risk groups, regional authorities said Tuesday.
> ...



Well it’s a thrice-off just here - but the claim that the immunity hadn’t had time to develop is entirely plausible (though not checkable with the information given).  

It takes I believe 6 weeks for immunity to develop (from the first inoculation I think) in the western studies - this doesn’t seem to be being emphasised; I think should be being shouted from the rooftops, as otherwise loads of people are going to get jabbed and go straight back to ‘normal’, with attendant risks. 

Also - none of the vaccines are 100% effective (and I don’t think data has been released on the Russian one) - some people are going to get it anyway, and some of them are going to die. Hopefully not very many.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 23, 2020)

I guessed around a few days or so?


----------



## 2hats (Nov 23, 2020)

Sunray said:


> Your reasoning?   If the vaccine works and doesn't make us sick, the pandemic ends. We can do all the things we were doing.
> Vaccinate rapidly enough and it also ends the virus, no hosts so it can't replicate.
> 
> We can genuinely wave goodbye to Covid-19, maybe figure out how to respond to pandemics in the future.


Top tip: try starting reading a little further back in the thread (say, about 2 pages or so). Mix in a little mutation, selection and degree of efficacy too.


----------



## elbows (Nov 23, 2020)

Sunray said:


> Your reasoning?   If the vaccine works and doesn't make us sick, the pandemic ends. We can do all the things we were doing.
> Vaccinate rapidly enough and it also ends the virus, no hosts so it can't replicate.
> 
> We can genuinely wave goodbye to Covid-19, maybe figure out how to respond to pandemics in the future.



I'm just not much into seeing things in terms of magic bullets, so its inevitable that I will take a cautious approach and wait and see. 

Vaccines should be a game changer, but that still doesn't mean 100% normality to me, but we will just have to wait and see. Plus absolute normality means different things to different people, and given for example the stuff going on with energy and climate, what's normal is bound to change rather a lot over the coming decades. I sort of expect that certain things peaked and will never quite return to pre-pandemic levels, but thats not just because of the virus, it will be interplay between the situations and changes the pandemic caused, and energy and economic stuff.


----------



## elbows (Nov 23, 2020)

2hats said:


> Top tip: try starting reading a little further back in the thread (say, about 2 pages or so). Mix in a little mutation, selection and degree of efficacy too.



Yes that stuff too. My expectations with those things currently have a rather broad range so I have no specific predictions to make, other than a general expectation that there will be setbacks of some kind at some point.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 23, 2020)

prunus said:


> Well it’s a thrice-off just here - but the claim that the immunity hadn’t had time to develop is entirely plausible (though not checkable with the information given).
> 
> It takes I believe 6 weeks for immunity to develop (from the first inoculation I think) in the western studies - this doesn’t seem to be being emphasised; I think should be being shouted from the rooftops, as otherwise loads of people are going to get jabbed and go straight back to ‘normal’, with attendant risks.
> 
> Also - none of the vaccines are 100% effective (and I don’t think data has been released on the Russian one) - some people are going to get it anyway, and some of them are going to die. Hopefully not very many.



Yeah the time frame hasn't been emphasised at all. I thought it was a few days at most.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 24, 2020)

I'm quite surprised that this thread hasn't moved all that much today .....

Some more detail about the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine :

The 90% efficacy rather than the 70% efficacy -- some details

A bit more about the half-doses turning out to be _possibly_ more effective than the full doses, initially

I'm sure there are better and more hard-core-sciencey articles around, but my search about Oxford stuff was quick for reasons


----------



## Wilf (Nov 24, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> It'll be a bar code tattoo on the forehead according to some...
> 
> Work based OH records for the first lots getting it I expect; care home residents and workers and healthcare workers. Rest would be GP records I expect. I don't think they'll be any proving you've had the vaccine though for anything, no matter what the newspapers say. I mean shops etc. can't even make people wear masks, no way is anything commercial like gigs or other events are going to be able to check medical records and prove things like valid medical exemptions for people who can't have the vaccine.
> 
> Wonder if some workplaces will make it compulsory? Healthcare and care homes could for staff for example.





Teaboy said:


> Flights would be the one place where I think where some sort of vaccine certificate may be used.



I can see the government might see the need for some kind of official or semi official proof of vaccination, purely for economic reasons.  Presumably there may be international agreements at some point about needing certification for air travel. At the other end of the scale I've seen ticketing agencies talking about wanting to see proof of a vaccination or recent negative test before allowing access to a gig. Just about the last thing the NHS or country needs are people getting random tests just to go and watch a tribute acts night at some local O2 academy, so there will be pressure for some kind of longer term proof of vaccination.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 25, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> I'm quite surprised that this thread hasn't moved all that much today .....
> Some more detail about the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine :
> The 90% efficacy rather than the 70% efficacy -- some details
> A bit more about the half-doses turning out to be _possibly_ more effective than the full doses, initially
> *I'm sure there are better and more hard-core-sciencey articles around, but my search about Oxford stuff was quick for reasons*



And even in same day's Guardian, there was a better/more detailed article about the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine  :




			
				Guardian headline said:
			
		

> *Vaccine results bring us a step closer to ending Covid, says Oxford scientist *


Looks like various professionals are positive about it, including this Doctor :




			
				Article said:
			
		

> Dr Richard Hatchett, the chief executive of the Coalition for Vaccine Preparedness (CEPI) which is involved in Covax**, said they believed the Oxford vaccine  “has the potential to significantly alter the course of the global pandemic. The data released today suggest the vaccine is safe and comparable in its efficacy to other licensed vaccines – including influenza – that are widely used to protect people around the world today.”



** Covax, the World Health Organization-led programme to distribute vaccines to all countries


----------



## 2hats (Nov 25, 2020)

There are issues with the Oxford/Astrazeneca study. Incomplete/inadequate data and question marks over the trial plans (modifying them on the fly is highly unusual).









						The AstraZeneca Covid Vaccine Data Isn't Up to Snuff
					

There's been even more good news this week, this time from the Oxford-AstraZeneca trials. But a closer look reveals some very shaky science.




					www.wired.com
				




The sub-group study with apparent 90% efficacy was only composed of 18-55 year olds and the low number of cases in that arm obviously raise questions as to how robust that 90% is.





__





						Science | AAAS
					






					www.sciencemag.org
				




None of three front runners have published all their trial data yet.

In short: more work needed.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 25, 2020)

What other data do they need? Is it just more examples of people being exposed to COVID-19? These are just preliminary results tho and more data needs to be published, but I thought this was known from the start?


----------



## Supine (Nov 25, 2020)

2hats said:


> There are issues with the Oxford/Astrazeneca study. Incomplete/inadequate data and question marks over the trial plans (modifying them on the fly is highly unusual).
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I was about to post that. Interesting read - I'll be keen to see some expert opinion on this stuff.


----------



## Sunray (Nov 25, 2020)

Here is an excellent podcast on the subject.  Some heavily involved people making these vaccines are getting excited.  









						A vaccine revolution – podcast
					

With the race now on for regulatory approval, production and distribution of three vaccine candidates, is the end of the pandemic within reach?




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## belboid (Nov 25, 2020)

2hats said:


> There are issues with the Oxford/Astrazeneca study. Incomplete/inadequate data and question marks over the trial plans (modifying them on the fly is highly unusual).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, the group I signed up for was in the 18-55 range, with a new group only added about two months ago.  That was also when I got offered a second shot, about three months after the first one, so not within the recommended period. _All _the trials are highly unusual though, as you don't normally get a willing set of volunteers on a sufficient scale, and it would be unethical to not allow them (us) an apparently safer version of the treatment. 

The doctor I saw this week was saying not to expect anything too quickly still, working out the correct first shot dosage still needs a fair bit of work.


----------



## 2hats (Nov 25, 2020)

frogwoman said:


> What other data do they need? Is it just more examples of people being exposed to COVID-19? These are just preliminary results tho and more data needs to be published, but I thought this was known from the start?


Sufficient data for the conclusions to be statistically robust and reproducible, rather than of a standard _adequate_ for feeding press releases?


----------



## mx wcfc (Nov 25, 2020)

frogwoman said:


> I'm guessing we'll get letters saying when it is due etc. I don't think I've ever looked forward to an injection so much


There was a GP on the local news earlier today telling people to make sure their doctor has up to date contact details, but especially a mobile phone number.  They want to be able to text everyone.  Quicker and cheaper.  

I get text reminders about the flu jab and appointments, all automated.


----------



## LDC (Nov 25, 2020)

Wilf said:


> I can see the government might see the need for some kind of official or semi official proof of vaccination, purely for economic reasons.  Presumably there may be international agreements at some point about needing certification for air travel. At the other end of the scale I've seen ticketing agencies talking about wanting to see proof of a vaccination or recent negative test before allowing access to a gig. Just about the last thing the NHS or country needs are people getting random tests just to go and watch a tribute acts night at some local O2 academy, so there will be pressure for some kind of longer term proof of vaccination.



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.


----------



## LDC (Nov 25, 2020)

The anti-vaxxer at work (NHS) I mentioned on here somewhere was getting stressed about whether they'd make it compulsory for healthcare workers. I wonder... You already have to have some (Hepititis), so it would be possible and wouldn't be entirely a new thing. Although it'd be harder for current employees maybe due to employment law/contracts, but new ones it could be made part of the contract more easily possibly?


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 25, 2020)

2hats , and also elbows and other science-aware  Urbans :

I have *far* from enough science awareness to *really* understand whether or not that Wired article (linked to by 2hats above) wrecks the Oxford/Astra/Zeneca vaccine project?


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 25, 2020)

Don't think it wrecks it no but I don't think that's what the article is saying


----------



## elbows (Nov 25, 2020)

Well its the sort of story that reminds me why I take a cautious approach, let others do the quick analysis, and play the long game in terms of how long it takes for me to form opinions about medicines and vaccines. And why I generally have a sneery attitude towards press releases. And why I dont generally believe in silver bullets, even when vaccines probably have the ability to be a game changer even if not quite the game ender some seem too tempted to imagine.

I dont mind reading the detail about vaccines but I am not confident enough about the subject to consider trying to speak with authority on the subject often, especially not when it comes to the detail of specific vaccines. Maybe there will be a time where I attempt to get properly clued up about all the tedious detail of a particular vaccine, but this isn't it, I'll be content to watch others weed out the field a bit first.


----------



## 2hats (Nov 25, 2020)

There are other concerns besides the paucity of data in older cohorts and failure to stick to the trial design, including: relatively small trial participant numbers, that subgroup analyses are likely to be less precise and can be prone to error, and of the limited ethnic diversity of sub-group trial participants. These are interim results and the figures quoted thus far may well change, could even change substantially (in either direction).

There are unanswered questions like: over time (ie repeated boosters) the viral vector used here may prompt an immune response reducing the efficacy of the vaccine (this may have been what was being observed in the sub-group who received the two standard doses and only saw about 62% efficacy) - that might necessitate regular reformulation with different vector serotypes (cf. the Russian Sputnik V, is reported to use two different serotypes for the prime and the booster doses; is now claiming >95% efficacy).

Nothing is 'wrecked'. It simply needs more work. Full, thorough vaccine trials unsurprisingly take time to collect adequate, high quality data, produce results we can trust, from which conclusions can be drawn and upon which decisions can be made.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 25, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> 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 (Nov 26, 2020)

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 (Nov 26, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> 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 (Nov 26, 2020)

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 (Nov 26, 2020)

two sheds said:


> Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine to undergo new global trial
> 
> 
> Share price drops as critics question claim vaccine could protect up to 90% of people
> ...


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


----------



## two sheds (Nov 26, 2020)

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 (Nov 26, 2020)

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 (Nov 27, 2020)

Supine said:


> 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 (Nov 27, 2020)

Wilf said:


> 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 (Nov 27, 2020)

elbows said:


> 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 (Nov 27, 2020)

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 (Nov 27, 2020)

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


----------



## belboid (Nov 27, 2020)

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


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 27, 2020)

I thought it was going to be the Oxford one?


----------



## StoneRoad (Nov 27, 2020)

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 (Nov 27, 2020)

frogwoman said:


> 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 (Nov 27, 2020)

... 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 (Nov 28, 2020)

Wilf said:


> ... 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 (Nov 28, 2020)

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 (Nov 28, 2020)

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


----------



## Badgers (Nov 29, 2020)

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 (Nov 29, 2020)

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 (Nov 29, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> 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).
> 
> ...



Phil Mitchell. Best and worst


----------



## LDC (Nov 29, 2020)

Supine said:


> Phil Mitchell. Best and worst



Bah, you got in before my quick edit.


----------



## StoneRoad (Nov 29, 2020)

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 (Nov 29, 2020)

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 (Nov 29, 2020)

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 (Nov 29, 2020)

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 (Nov 29, 2020)

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 (Nov 30, 2020)

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.




			
				Observer headline said:
			
		

> * 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*


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 30, 2020)

I've been thinking a bit about vaccine roll out and how they are going to stop (or if they are at all) the private clinics offering it at a cost.  I know the government have already said there would no queue jumping in this way but money talks and wealthy people usually get their way.

It seems likely that some sort of requirement for a vaccination certificate will be common place when entering other countries so those who travel a lot will be very keen to get hold of one for their holidays and business travel.  It also seems likely that there will be thriving private market for vaccination in many other countries.

The pressure on the government from business and their rich mates will be pretty intense.  It'll also be dressed up as a means of relieving pressure on the NHS etc.


----------



## Supine (Nov 30, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> 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.



Yeah, good article. The thing I haven't seen articulated is how much delay there I'll be if additional trials are required. They don't normally happen quickly.


----------



## belboid (Nov 30, 2020)

Supine said:


> Yeah, good article. The thing I haven't seen articulated is how much delay there I'll be if additional trials are required. They don't normally happen quickly.


The difference would be that there have already been enough trials to work out there are no clear or significant side effects so it’s just a question of working out the right dosages.   That will be much quicker, tho we’re looking at three months minimum.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 1, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> 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.


Sorry, belated reply as I've been largely offline a couple of days. Suppose I was really getting at the way the government have tended to push out some overly optimistic messages about the vaccine and life getting back to normal. In fact that's been just about their only political strategy this last fortnight or so, particularly as they battle with their own back benchers. I suspect some care home providers and probably residents and relatives were taking that as a sign they were close to getting the vaccine. That's certainly what a couple of providers were saying late last week.  Suppose all I'm saying is the government should be a bit more careful with their messaging. I'd guess johnson is very close to coming out with some sort sort of Churchill, 'this may not be the beginning of the end...' type twaddle.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 2, 2020)

BREAKING NEWS - the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine has been approved for use in the UK, roll-out will start early next week.


----------



## Supine (Dec 2, 2020)

I just turned up to post that   









						UK authorises Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine
					

Government authorises first COVID-19 vaccine on independent advice of medicines regulator.




					www.gov.uk


----------



## brogdale (Dec 2, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> BREAKING NEWS - the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine has been approved for use in the UK, roll-out will start early next week.


Is that the we’ve got hardly any of until March?

Wish I had any faith in the government’s ability to organise the purchase, refrigeration, distribution, accurate 2-stage deployment and recording of such a vaccine. Under Zaharwi it will, of course, end up being a costly, out-sourced fiasco.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 2, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Is that the we’ve got hardly any of until March?



No, this is one of the half dozen or so vaccines that the UK pre-ordered, in this case 40m doses, enough for 20m people.

It's the Moderna one that wasn't on the pre-order list, so the order for 7m doses put in now will not arrive until March.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 2, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> No, this is one of the half dozen or so vaccines that the UK pre-ordered, in this case 40m doses, enough for 20m people.
> 
> It's the Moderna one that wasn't on the pre-order list, so the order for 7m doses put in now will not arrive until March.


Ah, right

Just checked paper & it says maybe 10m doses this year, so 5m vaccinations, then?


----------



## brogdale (Dec 2, 2020)

Hancock saying enough for 400k “will arrive” next week.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Dec 2, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Hancock saying enough for 400k “will arrive” next week.




Let me guess how many politicians will get it


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 2, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Ah, right
> 
> Just checked paper & it says maybe 10m doses this year, so 5m vaccinations, then?



That sounds about right, and the rest as quick as they can provide them in the New Year.

Hancock said 50 hospitals are ready to accept delivery, I wonder if that's all that has freezers that can handle it, I know Worthing hospital has one, but didn't think to ask the SiS if they have one over at the Chichester site, nor if she knows how common these specialist freezers across the NHS.

They are also setting-up 'Nightingale' vaccination sites, which I think the army are organising.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 2, 2020)




----------



## LDC (Dec 2, 2020)

Artaxerxes said:


> Let me guess how many politicians will get it



None. And luckily the NHS and army are running the logistics so fingers crossed we should be OK.

NHS employs 1.5 million, but not all clinical, so probably enough for good percentage of clinical NHS staff in the next few weeks.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Dec 2, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> None. And luckily the NHS and army are running the logistics so fingers crossed we should be OK.
> 
> NHS employs 1.5 million, but not all clinical, so probably enough for good percentage of clinical NHS staff in the next few weeks.



I’m very much looking forward to wife getting the vaccine but she’ll be at the end of nhs queue sadly. Only just starting to get regular testing.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 2, 2020)

I suppose they warm it up before injecting it, otherwise one would get a cold shoulder  ?


----------



## Supine (Dec 2, 2020)

Our doctors have just tweeted that our community probably won't be getting this vaccine. Probably too difficult to cold chain it into the northern countryside. 

Vaccine for southern city dwellers only.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 2, 2020)

Supine said:


> Our doctors have just tweeted that our community probably won't be getting this vaccine. Probably too difficult to cold chain it into the northern countryside.
> 
> Vaccine for southern city dwellers only.



From my understanding, because of the logistics involved in storing this one, it'll be only available at some hospital and specialist vaccination sites across the UK. so not reserved for 'southern city dwellers' only.

They are waiting on the approval of the Oxford/Astrazeneca one for the roll-out to GPs, etc.


----------



## zora (Dec 2, 2020)

Am I right in thinking that rolling this vaccine out to NHS workers, coupled with the antigen testing for NHS staff, should also provide some useful data soon on how effective the vaccine is in reducing infectiousness/onward transmission of the virus?


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 2, 2020)

zora said:


> Am I right in thinking that rolling this vaccine out to NHS workers, coupled with the antigen testing for NHS staff, should also provide some useful data soon on how effective the vaccine is in reducing infectiousness/onward transmission of the virus?



Hopefully.  This seems very important info.


----------



## LDC (Dec 2, 2020)

Supine said:


> Our doctors have just tweeted that our community probably won't be getting this vaccine. Probably too difficult to cold chain it into the northern countryside.
> 
> Vaccine for southern city dwellers only.



That's bollocks. No particular 'community' is getting it or not getting it. That's not how it's being allocated.


----------



## StoneRoad (Dec 2, 2020)

The list is up on the beeb live page [10:18 today, 2nd Dec 2020]
Covid-19: 'No corners cut' in vaccine approval, regulator says - BBC News
I'm two steps down from everybody else in the household ! because I'm the youngest ...


----------



## StoneRoad (Dec 2, 2020)




----------



## LDC (Dec 2, 2020)

Quick investi-Google puts the risk of an anaphylaxis with vaccine around 1 in every million vaccines given if anyone interested, or hear any idiots going on about that. And that's reactions, not deaths.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 2, 2020)

One thing does occur is that by the very nature of prioritising the most vulnerable there are going to be quite a few who die anyway (from other causes) over the next few months.  Stand by for the _covid vaccine killed dear old gran_ stories.


----------



## LDC (Dec 2, 2020)

"The Covid vaccine made me do it your honour."


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 2, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> I've been thinking a bit about vaccine roll out and how they are going to stop (or if they are at all) the private clinics offering it at a cost.  I know the government have already said there would no queue jumping in this way but money talks and wealthy people usually get their way.
> 
> It seems likely that some sort of requirement for a vaccination certificate will be common place when entering other countries so those who travel a lot will be very keen to get hold of one for their holidays and business travel.  It also seems likely that there will be thriving private market for vaccination in many other countries.
> 
> The pressure on the government from business and their rich mates will be pretty intense.  It'll also be dressed up as a means of relieving pressure on the NHS etc.


Optimist's hat/ The UK govt has preordered shitloads of the Oxford one, which should be available in a couple of months, may be a bit more effective than first reported once they've tweaked the dosage, is a lot cheaper (couple of quid a dose), and can be kept in a fridge. By spring, it could be that regular GP surgeries are offering it to everyone.


----------



## LDC (Dec 2, 2020)

Maybe we need a "Covid vaccine; had it/having it/experiences" thread now...?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 2, 2020)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Optimist's hat/ The UK govt has preordered shitloads of the Oxford one, which should be available in a couple of months...



They have already manufactured shedloads, so should be available as soon as it's approved, which could be in the next few days.


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 2, 2020)

From that list, what happens after number nine: do those of us under 50 just not get one then?


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 2, 2020)

purenarcotic said:


> From that list, what happens after number nine: do those of us under 50 just not get one then?



I guess that is the immediate future.  Once all that's been sorted they'll start everyone else.  I guess they are hoping that by that time the Oxford one will be approved and that will be a much simpler and cheaper role out to the masses.


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 2, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> I guess that is the immediate future.  Once all that's been sorted they'll start everyone else.  I guess they are hoping that by that time the Oxford one will be approved and that will be a much simpler and cheaper role out to the masses.



Thats what I was wondering, especially as they’ve ordered enough Oxford for 50 million people.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 2, 2020)

purenarcotic said:


> From that list, what happens after number nine: do those of us under 50 just not get one then?



With around 20 million getting the Pfizer vaccine, and 100 million doses of the Oxford one ordered, enough for 50 m people, plus others also on order, I think there'll be plenty to go around.


----------



## LDC (Dec 2, 2020)

Wouldn't hold my breath for a vaccine if you're under 50 and with no serious underlying health issues. Second or third quarter of next year maybe?


----------



## platinumsage (Dec 2, 2020)

Apparently there are 30 million people on that list, so the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines won't cover them all.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 2, 2020)

I'm 42 with no relevant existing conditions.  I'm not really bothered about the vaccine for myself its the lives it will save and the level of normality it will hopefully bring.

ETA: I might start getting narked if vaccination becomes a pre-condition for certain activities like travel and the roll out in the UK takes an age.  Anyway getting ahead of myself.


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 2, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Wouldn't hold my breath for a vaccine if you're under 50 and with no serious underlying health issues. Second or third quarter of next year maybe?



That’s what I had in my head. I had wondered whether key workers (but not in health) would get some sort of priority but it doesn’t look like it.


----------



## LDC (Dec 2, 2020)

purenarcotic said:


> That’s what I had in my head. I had wondered whether key workers (but not in health) would get some sort of priority but it doesn’t look like it.



Yeah, I guess it potentially gets very complex and potentially causes massive social rifts when that starts being defined for things like vaccination. There's already some disquiet that younger people with serious underlying health issues aren't higher up the list.


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 2, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> I'm 42 with no relevant existing conditions.  I'm not really bothered about the vaccine for myself its the lives it will save and the level of normality it will hopefully bring.



I am, I am 31 but I am a key worker. We cannot carry on with no face to face support for much longer, it’s incredibly difficult. And it’s not actually practical, we end up offering face to face because what are you gonna done e.g.  I was with a colleague dropping food off to a family in a temporary flat trying to sort her heating out because she was freezing and because of her limited English she couldn’t read the instructions. Were we really gonna just leave the bags outside and say no to going in? It didn’t feel safe though, the kids were climbing over us...


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 2, 2020)

purenarcotic said:


> That’s what I had in my head. I had wondered whether key workers (but not in health) would get some sort of priority but it doesn’t look like it.



Once you get past frontline NHS and emergency services workers it actually becomes quite difficult to definitively say who is a key worker.  My sister is a primary school teacher and had to work through lockdown 1 for the kids of key workers.  She said it was amazing how many people suddenly decided they were key workers and were very insistent about it.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Dec 2, 2020)

I'm guessing once the airlines start insisting on a covid vaccine certificate to board their aircraft, and nation states do similar, it'll be a lot more difficult for the under 50s to travel about until they get their turn.


----------



## LDC (Dec 2, 2020)

purenarcotic said:


> I am, I am 31 but I am a key worker. We cannot carry on with no face to face support for much longer, it’s incredibly difficult. And it’s not actually practical, we end up offering face to face because what are you gonna done e.g.  I was with a colleague dropping food off to a family in a temporary flat trying to sort her heating out because she was freezing and because of her limited English she couldn’t read the instructions. Were we really gonna just leave the bags outside and say no to going in? It didn’t feel safe though, the kids were climbing over us...



I really hope the public education campaign around this vaccine is done well and in a variety of languages and methods of communication, and not just online ones.

The school near me had to have people at the front gate this morning with posters in various languages explaining collection time changes for the kids today due to the lack of English as a working language for so many of the parents. I also went to a local PO and shop yesterday and literally nobody out of about 15 people there were wearing masks, and I'd speculate that's hugely due to language and not understanding what's going on, even this far into the pandemic.


----------



## elbows (Dec 2, 2020)

zora said:


> Am I right in thinking that rolling this vaccine out to NHS workers, coupled with the antigen testing for NHS staff, should also provide some useful data soon on how effective the vaccine is in reducing infectiousness/onward transmission of the virus?



Well I wouldn't use the word soon but yeah, they are keen to learn more about that. And some hospitals have been taking part in studies of hospital transmission, including the use of genomic analysis of covid infections in the hope they can trace the pathways of infection in healthcare scenarios. dd the vaccine to that picture and something should be learnt, its just I dont want to put a timescale on it.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 2, 2020)

skyscraper101 said:


> I'm guessing once the airlines start insisting on a covid vaccine certificate to board their aircraft, and nation states do similar, it'll be a lot more difficult for the under 50s to travel about until they get their turn.



This is the question but as there is limited information available on whether being vaccinated means you can't still spread the virus so countries should still be cautious.  It would be pretty dumb to say that you can't come in without a vaccination certificate without knowing it means that person is not infectious.

That being said there is a lot of desperation out there at the moment to get tourism going.  Just look at the trouble the EU is is at the moment with their ski resorts.  I think a recent negative test is still going to be required for a good while yet.


----------



## LDC (Dec 2, 2020)

JCVI just published new guideline son vaccine priority.





__





						Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation
					

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) advises UK health departments on immunisation.




					www.gov.uk


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 2, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> Once you get past frontline NHS and emergency services workers it actually becomes quite difficult to definitively say who is a key worker.  My sister is a primary school teacher and had to work through lockdown 1 for the kids of key workers.  She said it was amazing how many people suddenly decided they were key workers and were very insistent about it.


Ha. A mate of mine has had a similar experience. She was pretty phlegmatic about working through lockdown despite being somewhat at risk due to her weight. But she was pissed off by the hypocritical attitudes she encountered among people who were not themselves prepared to do the kinds of things she was doing (social distancing not really an option often, particularly as she teaches 'problem' kids).

The pandemic has brought out some very good and some very bad in people.


----------



## elbows (Dec 2, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> JCVI just published new guideline son vaccine priority.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It didnt leap out at me from that page so here is a direct link to the document which I am skimming right now.



			https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/940396/Priority_groups_for_coronavirus__COVID-19__vaccination_-_advice_from_the_JCVI__2_December_2020.pdf


----------



## elbows (Dec 2, 2020)

So below is what their first phase recommendations, with the aim of targeting groups that represent 99% of preventable covid-19 mortality, looks like.

They go on to suggest that a subsequent phase should target those at greatest risk of hospitalisation, but also that vaccination of those at increased risk of exposure to the virus due to their occupation could also be a priority in that phase.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Dec 2, 2020)

I suppose there's nothing legally to stop private individuals (or most likely companies/organisations) from sourcing vaccines directly from Pfizer etc.

So in theory it would be possible to queue jump.


----------



## elbows (Dec 2, 2020)

skyscraper101 said:


> I suppose there's nothing legally to stop private individuals (or most likely companies/organisations) from sourcing vaccines directly from Pfizer etc.
> 
> So in theory it would be possible to queue jump.



I'm under the impression that the supply contracts dont allow the companies to siphon off supplies for private sale. But I wasn't the source of that knowledge and I havent found the posts where this came up previously.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Dec 2, 2020)

elbows said:


> I'm under the impression that the supply contracts dont allow the companies to siphon off supplies for private sale. But I wasn't the source of that knowledge and I havent found the posts where this came up previously.



I don't mean siphon off from the government procured stock, I mean buy directly in competition with national governments.

Surely at point of purchase it's still an open market?


----------



## elbows (Dec 2, 2020)

No I was talking about the same thing you describe, I dont think its an open market. But like I said, this is not an area where I have knowledge of my own, but I'm sure I read others saying this before. I might have remembered wrong.


----------



## Boudicca (Dec 2, 2020)

Both my parents are over 80 so at the front of the queue.  

Could be quite fun if roles are reversed and it's the 80+ group shopping for the younger cohorts.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 2, 2020)

skyscraper101 said:


> I don't mean siphon off from the government procured stock, I mean buy directly in competition with national governments.
> 
> Surely at point of purchase it's still an open market?



Yeah, I was musing on this earlier in the thread. In theory the UK has one of the most regulated drug markets in the world so they likely could regulate it if they so wished.  In reality though I don't know that they would.  There will be huge pressure from their wealthy mates to be allowed to go private.  In fact the really wealthy will just go to Swiss clinics etc anyway.

I have a friend who lives in Singapore and they've been told they will have the Moderna vaccine this month.  Obviously it will all be private.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Dec 2, 2020)

Boudicca said:


> Both my parents are over 80 so at the front of the queue.
> 
> Could be quite fun if roles are reversed and it's the 80+ group shopping for the younger cohorts.



Nightclubs will be full of OAPs having it large while the rest of us are stuck at home.


----------



## Sue (Dec 2, 2020)

elbows said:


> So below is what their first phase recommendations, with the aim of targeting groups that represent 99% of preventable covid-19 mortality, looks like.
> 
> They go on to suggest that a subsequent phase should target those at greatest risk of hospitalisation, but also that vaccination of those at increased risk of exposure to the virus due to their occupation could also be a priority in that phase.
> 
> View attachment 241445


So wonder if group 6 are essentially those who get the flu vaccine and aren't in groups 1-5?


----------



## elbows (Dec 2, 2020)

Sue said:


> So wonder if group 6 are essentially those who get the flu vaccine and aren't in groups 1-5?



In the full document there a list of clinical risk groups identified, but since the document is quite long I will quote it here:

• Chronic respiratory disease, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), cystic fibrosis and severe asthma
• Chronic heart disease (and vascular disease)
• Chronic kidney disease
• Chronic liver disease
• Chronic neurological disease including epilepsy
• Down’s syndrome
• Severe and profound learning disability
• Diabetes
• Solid organ, bone marrow and stem cell transplant recipients • People with specific cancers
• Immunosuppression due to disease or treatment
• Asplenia and splenic dysfunction
• Morbid obesity
• Severe mental illness

Note that this applies to group 6, rather than the clinically extremely vulnerable (shielding patients) from higher priority group 4.


----------



## LDC (Dec 2, 2020)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Nightclubs will be full of OAPs having it large while the rest of us are stuck at home.



Yeah, when some people were going on about shielding the old and vulnerable and letting the young do whatever as an alternative to lockdown I always thought the other way round would be better, the younger have plenty of time left for fun once this is over, let the older ones have the freedom as a priority. (Caveat: probably not medically and infection risk actually a good idea...)


----------



## Sunray (Dec 2, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Wouldn't hold my breath for a vaccine if you're under 50 and with no serious underlying health issues. Second or third quarter of next year maybe?



I think they are going try to be very aggressive with regard to vaccinations, with the idea everyone who wants one will get one by end April if they have the vaccines to give to people.  It does offer an end to this pandemic so the quicker the better for everyone.

I do hope you get a digital certificate which can be seen by venues when you have had the vaccine.  Vaccines are only truly effective if the take up is high.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 2, 2020)

Sunray said:


> I think they are going try to be very aggressive with regard to vaccinations, with the idea everyone who wants one will get one by end April if they have the vaccines to give to people.  It does offer an end to this pandemic so the quicker the better for everyone.



Unfortunately that's not the impression I get.  Last time I saw Johnson talking about vaccines a couple of weeks back he was saying hopefully by Easter for the most vulnerable groups but he wasn't sticking his hat on it. Also given his propensity for baseless overly optimistic claims even that could be a stretch.

I wouldn't get your hopes up yet.


----------



## LDC (Dec 2, 2020)

Just a reminder; first dose given on day 0, second dose given on day 21, full immunity from day 28.

So 4 weeks from having the first dose to having full immunity (although possibily some limited immunity before that).


----------



## brogdale (Dec 2, 2020)

Anyone with any knowledge of vaccine logistics know whether or not the govt. has given any thought to how the most infirm elderly can be vaccinated. I'm figuring that many will be physically unable to make it into where the cold chamber delivery is proposed, or mentally unsure after 9 months of self-isolation.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 2, 2020)

I'm guessing you can get the vaccine if you've already had covid but will you have to wait a period of time before you can get it?


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 2, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Anyone with any knowledge of vaccine logistics know whether or not the govt. has given any thought to how the most infirm elderly can be vaccinated. I'm figuring that many will be physically unable to make it into where the cold chamber delivery is proposed, or mentally unsure after 9 months of self-isolation.



Its a good question.  The logistics of the whole operation just get more mind boggling the closer you look.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 2, 2020)

frogwoman said:


> I'm guessing you can get the vaccine if you've already had covid but will you have to wait a period of time before you can get it?


There's also quite a few health professionals who've taken part in the Oxford vaccine blind trials who don't know if they've been given the vaccine or the placebo; very difficult for them to know whether or not they should take the Pfizer if offered?


----------



## brogdale (Dec 2, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> Its a good question.  The logistics of the whole operation just get more mind boggling the closer you look.


Really worried that mu disabled parents (85+) will be called out of their strictly imposed self-isolation into a potentially dangerous environment/mixing to be given the vaccine. Could produce it's own spike if immune its only develops properly weeks after jab 1.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 2, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Anyone with any knowledge of vaccine logistics know whether or not the govt. has given any thought to how the most infirm elderly can be vaccinated. I'm figuring that many will be physically unable to make it into where the cold chamber delivery is proposed, or mentally unsure after 9 months of self-isolation.


Pfizer state BNT162b2 vaccine vials can be stored for up to 5 days at standard refrigeration (2-8C) having been thawed from -70C(±10C) storage (30 days lifetime).


> To assure product quality, the companies have developed specially designed, temperature-controlled shippers for the BNT162b2 vaccine candidate, which can maintain recommended storage conditions (-70°C ±10°C) for extended periods of time without any additional equipment but dry ice. The shipper can maintain temperature for 10 days unopened which allows for transportation to markets globally. Once open, a vaccination centre may use the specially designed shippers as a temporary storage solution to maintain the recommended storage conditions (-70°C ±10°C) up to 30 days with re-icing every five days in accordance with the handling instructions. Each shipper contains a GPS-enabled thermal sensor to track the location and temperature of each vaccine shipment 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Once thawed, the vaccine vial can be stored for up to five days at refrigerated (2-8°C) conditions.


----------



## belboid (Dec 2, 2020)

brogdale said:


> There's also quite a few health professionals who've taken part in the Oxford vaccine blind trials who don't know if they've been given the vaccine or the placebo; very difficult for them to know whether or not they should take the Pfizer if offered?


They will be told which they had and offered any approved alternative, I asked when I was last in for my bloods.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 2, 2020)

2hats said:


> Pfizer state BNT162b2 vaccine vials can be stored for up to 5 days at standard refrigeration (2-8C) having been thawed from -70C(±10C) storage (30 days lifetime).


Good info, but what really matters is how well the govt. respond to the challenge of the cold chamber/life-span of the Pfizer; I fear they'll go for the cheapest, centralised big centre delivery method.


----------



## LDC (Dec 2, 2020)

brogdale said:


> There's also quite a few health professionals who've taken part in the Oxford vaccine blind trials who don't know if they've been given the vaccine or the placebo; very difficult for them to know whether or not they should take the Pfizer if offered?



I'm a healthcare worker and am on another vaccine trial, and when we get offered a vaccine for real (maybe this one?) then we have to contact the trial for advice. They have said if we take the vaccine then we have to withdraw from the trial (for obvious reasons) so I guess some people might not have the vaccine to keep the numbers in the trial up high enough.

When we withdraw from the trial then they 'unblind' us and we can find out whether we had the vaccine or placebo. Then we can make a decision whether to have the vaccine or not bother if we've had the one on the trial.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 2, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Good info, but what really matters is how well the govt. respond to the challenge of the cold chamber/life-span of the Pfizer; I fear they'll go for the cheapest, centralised big centre delivery method.


As in..


----------



## Sunray (Dec 2, 2020)

The -70 storage is an issue but from what I can gather the NHS is already on top of this




			
				The Guardian said:
			
		

> Martin Sawer, the executive director of the Healthcare Distribution Association, which represents the warehouse owners, said the vaccine will be kept in specially-designed extreme-low temperature freezers *acquired by the NHS* *and lent to warehouses* for the duration of the rollout. Once an order is received from vaccination centres, stocks will be moved to “massive fridges the size of small bungalows” to be defrosted over three hours and, once thawed, placed in refrigerated vans immediately for distribution.



Thankfully this appears to be an NHS lead operation, might get it done as fast as it's possible to do and be safe while doing it.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 2, 2020)

If theres any kind of a fuck up with these rushed but hopefully sound vaccines a la the swine flu narcolepsy cases i fear the loonasphere will explode to epic proportions...its hard to know how big it is now, but i do worry as to how big it can get


----------



## elbows (Dec 2, 2020)

No matter how much time they spend in press conferences pointing out that we dont yet have data that would tell us to what extent if any the vaccines stop people transmitting the virus, we still end up with articles like this one that include several scenarios that are only unlocked if that sort of protection is demonstrated.









						NHS workers: 'Vaccine is a game changer'
					

NHS workers have been giving their reaction to the news the vaccine will be rolled out in the UK from next week.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Sunray (Dec 2, 2020)

elbows said:


> No matter how much time they spend in press conferences pointing out that we dont yet have data that would tell us to what extent if any the vaccines stop people transmitting the virus, we still end up with articles like this one that include several scenarios that are only unlocked if that sort of protection is demonstrated.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The Oxford/AztraZeneca trial had people take and send in swabs weekly.  So this will be available during its approval process.


----------



## editor (Dec 3, 2020)

Good piece here: 








						Less than a year to develop a COVID vaccine – here's why you shouldn't be alarmed
					

Vaccines are being touted as taking seven to ten years to develop. But you shouldn’t be worried that COVID vaccines only took less than a year.




					theconversation.com


----------



## Supine (Dec 4, 2020)

Pfizer are reducing their estimated supply volumes for 2020 due to quality issues in the supply chain. Still looking ok for 2021. 

It's not unusual for this kind of thing to happen during the startup phase of pharma manufacturing. Infact it should be seen as a good thing to know quality comes first. No idea if this impacts UK but possibly not as I think we have our 2020 supplies already.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 4, 2020)

We could have done without  Fauci's comments, which will feed the anti-vaxxer loons. 



> The UK approved a Covid-19 vaccine without compromising safety, the medicines regulator said after America’s top infectious disease expert questioned the level of scrutiny.
> 
> Dr Anthony Fauci, the director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, warned the speed at which the UK approved the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine could undermine confidence in the jab.
> 
> Dr Fauci told CBS American regulators would do a “more thorough job”, although he later backed away from the comments, saying he was not implying sloppiness on the part of British authorities, in whom he had “great faith”.











						Top US scientist says UK has 'rushed through' vaccine approval
					

The European regulator has also criticised the approval of the vaccine using emergency powers, insisting that its own, slower approach is more appropriate




					www.walesonline.co.uk


----------



## platinumsage (Dec 4, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> We could have done without  Fauci's comments, which will feed the anti-vaxxer loons.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



He's now saying that he mis-spoke.









						Fauci apologises for saying UK 'rushed' vaccine
					

After apparent criticism from the US expert, the UK defended the safety and efficacy of the vaccine.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 4, 2020)

platinumsage said:


> He's now saying that he mis-spoke.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That sadly will get brushed over by the loons, they only magnify the stuff that fits their agenda.

Oh, and the European Medicines Agency has also echoed what Fauci originally said. 









						EU criticises ‘hasty’ UK approval of COVID-19 vaccine
					

European regulator says its approval process is more appropriate, as German politician calls UK move ‘problematic’.




					www.aljazeera.com


----------



## Supine (Dec 4, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Oh, and the European Medicines Agency has also echoed what Fauci originally said.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I can't see anything in that link specifically about EMA critising the decision. Looks like shoddy journalism with a couple of quotes from random politicians. 

The MHRA are leaders in the field. I'm going to keep trusting them for now.


----------



## elbows (Dec 4, 2020)

For me such things were an inevitable consequence of other countries feeling pressure as a result of the UKs accelerated timing. That and idiots like Williamson trying to turn the whole thing into a flag waving exercise.



> The European Medicines Agency (EMA), which is in charge of approving the vaccine in the EU, defended its time frame in a statement.
> 
> It said it had the "most appropriate" method to approve the vaccine.
> 
> ...











						Covid: Are countries under pressure to approve a vaccine?
					

After the UK's approval of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, are other nations under pressure to follow suit?



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




Broadly speaking I think most places have accelerated things and additional surveillance will be required during vaccine rollout to make sure certain safety implications of rushing are adequately compensated for. The real shit should not hit the UK fan unless the EU regulator turns out to be unhappy with something in the vaccine data as they scrutinise it in the weeks ahead, causing them to reach a different conclusion to that of the UK. Then things would get messy, but its not something I particularly expect to happen.


----------



## elbows (Dec 4, 2020)

Sunray said:


> The Oxford/AztraZeneca trial had people take and send in swabs weekly.  So this will be available during its approval process.



Ah I note the following from a document that bimble just mentioned on another thread, which contains something of relevance:



> The level of sterilising immunity provided by natural infection or immunisation is not yet fully understood. Data on the level of sterilising immunity provided by natural infection should be available from the SIREN study and the Oxford Health Care Worker study before the end of the year. Data on the level of sterilising immunity provided by immunisation should be available from some vaccine studies before the end of the year.



From the key uncertainties bit of https://assets.publishing.service.g...96/S907_NERVTAG_certifying_COVID_immunity.pdf


----------



## weltweit (Dec 4, 2020)

Russia apparently has "Sputnik B" vaccine, it seems it hasn't yet finished trials.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 4, 2020)

Really good article (IMO!) by Charlotte Summers in today's Guardian, on why there are a lot of reasons to trust the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine.




			
				Guardian headline said:
			
		

> *The Covid vaccine arrived quickly – but there's every reason to trust it*
> *It’s safe, it works, and it gives a tantalising glimpse of what else might be achieved given sufficient political will*
> 
> *Dr Charlotte Summers is a lecturer in intensive care medicine at the University of Cambridge*


Plenty of good detail on exactly how the (new) mRNA  method works --- but despite the sciencey detail, I found what she wrote nice and accessibly for non-scientists such as me 

She also has a pretty sound-looking argument about why (despite the speed of development and approval with this), concerns about this vaccine being less safe, are misplaced


----------



## Badgers (Dec 5, 2020)




----------



## elbows (Dec 5, 2020)

A pretty good reality check regarding stuff like how many people need vaccinating before things like population immunity and utter normality become relevant.









						Covid-19: Will a vaccine give us our old lives back? - BBC News
					

Why vaccines need to reach a huge number of people before we can safely ditch our face masks.




					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 5, 2020)

A mate of mine said that she's been advised _not_ to get the flu vaccine because of having an autoimmune condition, and she is slightly nervous about having this Covid one even though she told me that she almost certainly is going to get it.

Is there any information I can send her that can reassure her that it won't be an issue?


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 5, 2020)

frogwoman said:


> A mate of mine said that she's been advised _not_ to get the flu vaccine because of having an autoimmune condition, and she is slightly nervous about having this Covid one even though she told me that she almost certainly is going to get it.
> 
> Is there any information I can send her that can reassure her that it won't be an issue?



She should ask her dr or consultant. Some people will not be eligible for the COVID vaccine because of their underlying condition. If she has been told she can get it, I assume it will be because the mechanism of how the vaccine works is different to how the flu vaccine works.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 5, 2020)

purenarcotic said:


> She should ask her dr or consultant. Some people will not be eligible for the COVID vaccine because of their underlying condition. If she has been told she can get it, I assume it will be because the mechanism of how the vaccine works is different to how the flu vaccine works.



what about the whole issue of vaccination certificates etc?


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 5, 2020)

frogwoman said:


> what about the whole issue of vaccination certificates etc?



Those are speculation though. If they do come into be, maybe they will create exemptions that can be issued by dr / consultant. I don’t know, none of us do.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 5, 2020)

elbows said:


> A pretty good reality check regarding stuff like how many people need vaccinating before things like population immunity and utter normality become relevant.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Good corrective read (  )..

But I hope there aren't too many people overall -- at least, not on Urban!! -- hoping for population-level immunity or complete normality in short order.

But I *do* tend to think that in the context of at least the UK and Western countries (  ), there'll be significant improvements as 2021 gets on.
That is, as more and more vaccine doses get acquired and distributed and given.

I am aware of two doses being needed, and of people needing a few weeks before two doses of a vaccine kick in properly.

I am though *really* hoping that the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine gets approved soon.
I believe that the MHRA are focussing on that right now, and that a peer-reviewed Lancet article is in the pipline too.
Emergency MHRA approval in early New Year, or even  before Xmas, has been suggested?

I wish for approval of this hugely important extra vaccine *a lot* (obviously without any risk of rushing, or of cutting any corners, obvs!).

Not least because the UK Government has ordered 100 million doses (?) of Oxford/AZ,, and it won't need deep-freeze storage in the way that Pfizer/BioNTech's vaccine and Moderna's vaccine will.

If I recollect '100 million' rightly, for Oxford/AZ -- that's a *LOT* of doses!

So some earlier talk of _exceptionally_ long delays, just _might_ turn out overdone.
ETA -- by which I mean no real effect of the vaccination programme until very late 2021 or 2022** -- that would be depressing  (although earlier this year, before vaccines began to materialise at all, late 2021 or 2022 could easily have been seen to be on the optimistic side?!)

**I don't think the BBC article was suggesting those dates about the UK at least, anyway. It was correctly trying to take a broader, more world-wide perspective (that's how I read it , anyway).


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 5, 2020)

(Right! I don't think I need any more edits and corrections to the above post now! I'm sober, but I typoed a load of mistakes and left out stuff in the first version  )


----------



## Wilf (Dec 6, 2020)

Just a minor aside on vaccines: I had my flu jab today as part of the 50-64 year old group, after getting a text from my GP saying to book it a week ago.  When I got there, there was a queue of maybe 30 people outside, along with another dozen inside the waiting room.  Turned out they were using one GP practice to process patients from 2 practices.  No problem with that though the social distancing was a bit lax in places. What I did find significant was that a practice nurse was going up and down the queue telling people that the vaccine being used (Flublok) was unlicensed in this country though it is licensed in the U.S and is under emergency license here.  I had a minor  at the point, but went on to have it, assuming there would have been enough checks of one sort or another.

Reason I mention this is I can see the logic of only telling patients at the point they are in the queue as a logistics issue, maximising the number accepting the vaccine whilst avoiding the practice having to spend time in dialogue with patients. But it's really not a good look and probably doesn't help the mindset of anybody who might be a bit twitchy about accepting the covid vaccine. If you really want to build trust you need a mature and open discussion between government, health professionals and the public.

p.s. I've just checked and there were media reports about Flublok getting a temporary licence a few weeks ago.  I think the point still stands though about having an actual open, mature discussion. There's going to be a real issue about covid vaccine refuseniks, right to the point where it will make herd immunity more difficult to achieve.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 6, 2020)

Wilf I had a text offering me a flue jab just yesterday, I am 56 but I haven't ever had a jab so far. I didn't think I would bother, never had the flue. Is that irresponsible?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 6, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Wilf I had a text offering me a flue jab just yesterday, I am 56 but I haven't ever had a jab so far. I didn't think I would bother, never had the flue. Is that irresponsible?


Dunno really, I'd think about it purely in terms of self interest. Getting flu in conjunction with Covid isn't a very inviting prospect.


----------



## Sue (Dec 6, 2020)

purenarcotic said:


> Those are speculation though. If they do come into be, maybe they will create exemptions that can be issued by dr / consultant. I don’t know, none of us do.


I can't get live vaccines and when I went to somewhere where I might need a yellow fever certificate*, my consultant wrote a letter explaining why I couldn't get it.  Seemed to be a pretty standard thing so assume something similar would apply for this for if people can't be vaccinated for medical reasons.

*It's only an issue in certain parts of that country -- where I wasn't going to -- but sometimes they apparently ask for it when you arrive on international flights to the capital city, even though it's not in a  yellow fever area.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 6, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Wilf I had a text offering me a flue jab just yesterday, I am 56 but I haven't ever had a jab so far. I didn't think I would bother, never had the flue. Is that irresponsible?



I am having a flu jab as part of the over 50's programme this year, the thought of being unlucky and getting both flu & covid at the same time is enough to motivate me, as there would be a massive increased risk of serious illness or death.


----------



## Yu_Gi_Oh (Dec 6, 2020)

My dad caught Covid, and the only place he'd been was for his flu vaccine.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 6, 2020)

Yu_Gi_Oh said:


> My dad caught Covid, and the only place he'd been was for his flu vaccine.



Hope he's OK.


----------



## Yu_Gi_Oh (Dec 6, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Hope he's OK.



Oh, he's fine, thank you.


----------



## StoneRoad (Dec 6, 2020)

Had the flu jab way back (end of Sept) now I'm hoping for the covid one as soon as they get down to my age group. 
Not helped by our local area now having a fairly serious spike in the case rate [over 400 / 100k] - although, not in absolute / actual case numbers.
Unless I can sneak one slightly early as a) the rest of my household are all over 65, and b) with some health issues of mine (principally stupidly low blood pressure and a peculiar digestive system - but neither of those are likely to help push me up the list !)
The other alternative is grabbing a refusenik's ( or someone much older, who's died recently) doses to save wastage [which wouldn't apply to the Oxford vax] ...


----------



## elbows (Dec 6, 2020)

StoneRoad said:


> The other alternative is grabbing a refusenik's ( or someone much older, who's died recently) doses to save wastage [which wouldn't apply to the Oxford vax] ...



I doubt that the system is actually going to be setup to enable that option. Bit too early to tell but I dont really see how that would work, especially since they wont be expecting 100% uptake in any target group in the first place.


----------



## Sue (Dec 6, 2020)

StoneRoad said:


> Unless I can sneak one slightly early as a) the rest of my household are all over 65, and b) with some health issues of mine (principally stupidly low blood pressure and a peculiar digestive system - but neither of those are likely to help push me up the list !)
> The other alternative is grabbing a refusenik's ( or someone much older, who's died recently) doses to save wastage [which wouldn't apply to the Oxford vax] ...





elbows said:


> I doubt that the system is actually going to be setup to enable that option. Bit too early to tell but I dont really see how that would work, especially since they wont be expecting 100% uptake in any target group in the first place.


And TBF, it shouldn't work. They're prioritising groups of people for good reasons. Trying to queue jump -- because essentially that's what you seem to be saying -- is shit.


----------



## elbows (Dec 6, 2020)

The most obvious queue-jumpers in the making are the various high profile people who are lining up to take the vaccine as part of a campaign to encourage the masses to get vaccinated.


----------



## StoneRoad (Dec 6, 2020)

Sue said:


> And TBF, it shouldn't work. They're prioritising groups of people for good reasons. Trying to queue jump -- because essentially that's what you seem to be saying -- is shit.


There's a reason - I live with three older people, including my OH who does have health issues and one of the other two is months away from their 70th
Also.  I'm already over 64, and it is only a matter of a few months before I get to 65 (and close enough that they were happy to do the flu jab) ...

If I was years younger I wouldn't be worried about waiting in the queue ...


----------



## Wilf (Dec 6, 2020)

Between 20 and 35% saying they might not take the vaccine, depending on the question asked:
One in three ‘unlikely to take Covid vaccine’ | Coronavirus | The Guardian 
My pure guess is it will be nearer to the lower figure when push comes to shove, but still worrying with regard to achieving 'herd immunity'. As well as refuseniks, there are going to plenty of others who can't take it for medical reasons and a probably larger number who have come off the council tax register, aren't with a GP or are otherwise - shit phrase alert - 'hard to reach'.


----------



## elbows (Dec 6, 2020)

Herd immunity is absolutely nowhere on my radar with this disease and it would not surprise me if it is never an option that come within a million miles of our reach.

Protecting a percentage of the population who would otherwise be at risk of hospitalisation and death is where my sights are set. Other possibilities exist, but are not something I would want to fill peoples heads with in 2020 or 2021.


----------



## Boudicca (Dec 6, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Between 20 and 35% saying they might not take the vaccine, depending on the question asked:
> One in three ‘unlikely to take Covid vaccine’ | Coronavirus | The Guardian
> My pure guess is it will be nearer to the lower figure when push comes to shove, but still worrying with regard to achieving 'herd immunity'. As well as refuseniks, there are going to plenty of others who can't take it for medical reasons and a probably larger number who have come off the council tax register, aren't with a GP or are otherwise - shit phrase alert - 'hard to reach'.


I live with a couple of people who have said they won't be getting vaccinated.  One works for the NHS (in an admin role) and will change her mind the minute she realises that she might not be able to go abroad without it.  The other is more of a loon (she has a cable to her laptop as wifi gives her a headache) but works in retirement housing and will be under some pressure to have it done, I think.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 6, 2020)

Boudicca said:


> One works for the NHS (in an admin role) and will change her mind the minute she realises that she might not be able to go abroad without it.



When that penny drops, a lot of anti-vaxxers will be queuing up for it.


----------



## nyxx (Dec 6, 2020)

elbows said:


> Herd immunity is absolutely nowhere on my radar with this disease and it would not surprise me if it is never an option that come within a million miles of our reach.
> 
> Protecting a percentage of the population who would otherwise be at risk of hospitalisation and death is where my sights are set. Other possibilities exist, but are not something I would want to fill peoples heads with in 2020 or 2021.


Yeah this.
I’ve had a listen to the indie sage briefing from Friday plus a bbc sounds episode on it & sounded like herd immunity is not remotely on the horizon even if uptake of the vaccines which have positive results is high.


----------



## LDC (Dec 6, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Wilf I had a text offering me a flue jab just yesterday, I am 56 but I haven't ever had a jab so far. I didn't think I would bother, never had the flue. Is that irresponsible?



Have the jab weltweit . Why on earth wouldn't you? And having never had the flu is completely irrelevant to the issue. (Except that if you'd had it before you might be keener to have the jab.)


----------



## LDC (Dec 6, 2020)

Boudicca said:


> I live with a couple of people who have said they won't be getting vaccinated.  One works for the NHS (in an admin role) and will change her mind the minute she realises that she might not be able to go abroad without it.  The other is more of a loon (she has a cable to her laptop as wifi gives her a headache) but works in retirement housing and will be under some pressure to have it done, I think.



Yeah, I've met a few NHS staff who won't get it, a mix of slight concern through to outright conspiracy bollocks. Wifi headache though, fucking electricity sensitivity nonsense. No wonder she won't get a vaccine the dick.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 6, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Have the jab weltweit . Why on earth wouldn't you? And having never had the flu is completely irrelevant to the issue. (Except that if you'd had it before you might be keener to have the jab.)


Hi LynnDoyleCooper, I might be taking up resources from others who really need it - you are right though if I had had it before I would be in that queue already.


----------



## Duncan2 (Dec 6, 2020)

My mother,as i may have mentioned, will have gone once round the clock if she can just survive until 2031 so I aim to push her up the queue as far as proves possible.That said she doesn't work or live in a Care Home so she won't be done in the first wave and,I suppose,won't get the Pfizer jab at all.
   I am assuming the procedure is to wait for a call from her GP does anyone know different I wonder?


----------



## LDC (Dec 6, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Hi LynnDoyleCooper, I might be taking up resources from others who really need it - you are right though if I had had it before I would be in that queue already.



If you've been offered it take it, it's for a reason and it's a fair thing to get. Flu is grim, flu plus covid can be very shitty.


----------



## LDC (Dec 6, 2020)

Duncan2 said:


> My mother,as i may have mentioned, will have gone once round the clock if she can just survive until 2031 so I aim to push her up the queue as far as proves possible.That said she doesn't work or live in a Care Home so she won't be done in the first wave and,I suppose,won't get the Pfizer jab at all.
> I am assuming the procedure is to wait for a call from her GP does anyone know different I wonder?



There hopefully won't be any pushing anyone up the queue. She'll be contacted when she's due it by her GP or similar. Some are being done when people go for appointments (hospital or GP) generally.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 6, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> There hopefully won't be any pushing anyone up the queue. ..



A saw somewhere today that the Queen and Prince Philip are waiting for their turn.


----------



## StoneRoad (Dec 6, 2020)

weltweit - IIRC, the nhs ordered extra flu vax for this winter, to be able to offer the jab to the 50 - 65 year olds.

so, no you are not taking it away from more "deserving cases"

and if you've never had flu you've been lucky, it is a miserable thing to have. Some of the varieties are worse than others.
Getting it and covid together would definitely not be pleasant ...


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 6, 2020)

Excellent article -- bigger and better than the good one I posted upthread I think  -- about how vaccine development has been progressing (worldwide) all year.
Robin McKie is The Observer's science editor, and he's done pretty good stuff about both climate change and (attacking) science-debunking, also about Covid, in the past months 




			
				Observer headline said:
			
		

> *The vaccine miracle: how scientists waged the battle against Covid-19*
> *We trace the extraordinary research effort, from the discovery of the virus’s structure to the start of inoculations this week*



Most of the article is about the 2020 history of it all , but towards the end we then get this :



			
				Immunology expert said:
			
		

> “In a way I am surprised that is has all gone so smoothly so far,” said Eleanor Riley, professor of immunology at Edinburgh University. “Normally, when you’re launching a new vaccine, you expect something, at some point, not to pan out as expected. However, things have moved forward seamlessly – which is great.”






			
				Robin McKie said:
			
		

> Nevertheless, a number of key concerns still have to be resolved. None of the early vaccines have demonstrated an ability to reduce the spread of the disease within a population. Vaccinated people, while protected against severe symptoms, could still transmit infection to others and that is a crucial issue, said Riley ...  “If we want to have a Covid-free future, then we need something that really suppresses transmission. If not, then the virus will circulate non-stop and anybody who has not been vaccinated is always going to be at risk. In the short term it is not a problem. We just need to save lives. But in the longer term it will be an issue.”


Although .....



> One encouraging hint has been provided by the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine. During its trials, participants were routinely tested to see if those getting the vaccine had lower viral loads in their throats and noses than those who got the placebo. *Early signs suggested they did have lower loads and may therefore be less likely to transmit the virus. “I think it would be surprising if the vaccines we have got already did not limit transmission in some way,”* added Riley. “We should find out soon.”


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Hi LynnDoyleCooper, I might be taking up resources from others who really need it - you are right though if I had had it before I would be in that queue already.


I'm pretty sure they've budgeted for everyone getting it or something like. Also, the speed they do the injections in these mass inoculation drives means you'll only be taking up seconds of their time.  Despite the 15-20 minutes in the queue, I was probably in the room where I got the shot for 30 seconds.


----------



## StoneRoad (Dec 7, 2020)

Wilf said:


> I'm pretty sure they've budgeted for everyone getting it or something like. Also, the speed they do the injections in these mass inoculation drives means you'll only be taking up seconds of their time.  Despite the 15-20 minutes in the queue, I was probably in the room where I got the shot for 30 seconds.


My GP's had timed appointments (to allow for cleaning - but I didn't touch ouwt, not even the door handle), left open for ventilation) plus masks, sanitizer etc - They were allowing 3 - 5 minutes per person from entering to exiting - including the walks to the injection stations [the extra was if someone was getting the pneumonia jab at the same time]


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2020)

Typically half arsed plans in terms of vaccine 'passports'. When vaccinated you will get a card to carry, lacking any personal information so of little practical use as a passport to go into gigs, get flights etc. Essentially, little more than a reminder to get the 2nd dose.
Covid vaccine card: What the NHS vaccination cards will say, and latest on the issue of 'immunity passports' (inews.co.uk) 
Beyond that the government not looking likely to introduce official passports but, you guessed it, leaving it to the private sector.

I do get the irony of me, an anarchist, annoyed about the government not introducing something with some of the elements of an identity card. But if people have nothing other than a depersonalised card saying they've had the vaccine + venues champing at the bit to open up, there's potential for people who haven't had the vaccine to use their mates card etc.


----------



## Cloo (Dec 7, 2020)

I do have a feeling (I wonder why?   ) that the gov still doesn't really know how it's going to get the Pfizer out to people given the freezing issues. I would not be wildly suprised to see 1000s of shots lost to miscalculation in the coming weeks.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 8, 2020)

Covid-19 vaccine: First person receives Pfizer jab in UK
					

Margaret Keenan, who turns 91 next week, becomes the first person in the world to get the jab as part of a mass vaccination programme, calling it the "best early birthday present".



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 8, 2020)

And, the second person to get it - William Shakespeare of Warwickshire. 










						William Shakespeare becomes second person in world to receive Covid vaccine
					

No, we're not kidding.




					metro.co.uk


----------



## Cloo (Dec 8, 2020)

I am happy this is happening, I have to believe it'll make some difference dispite the cock-ups that are doubtless coming.


----------



## Sunray (Dec 8, 2020)

Cloo said:


> I do have a feeling (I wonder why?   ) that the gov still doesn't really know how it's going to get the Pfizer out to people given the freezing issues. I would not be wildly suprised to see 1000s of shots lost to miscalculation in the coming weeks.



This is why I believe the Oxford vaccine is probably what most people will get.   40 million doses of the Pfizer vaccine cost the government £800 million.
100 million AstraZenecia is half that and you don’t need special equipment apart from a working fridge. Also being produced in the uk.
Quite a lot of talk regarding how long we are immune to this virus but there is evidence is quite a long time. Antibodies aren’t the only defence mechanism we have
Why do we develop lifelong immunity to some diseases, but not others?








						'Killer' cells in Ebola immunity study could help Covid research
					

Research finds Ebola survivors showing no antibodies still have lasting capacity to fight virus




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 8, 2020)

I appreciate there is still a very long way to go, but the news of these vaccinations taking place today, well, it's the best thing I have heard in months. I so want to give my mum & mother in law a hug, seeing M-I-L through a window since February has been so shit, really had enough now, so this glimmer of hope is unbelievably welcome and those boffs who've come up with these vaccines so quickly are gods.


----------



## StoneRoad (Dec 8, 2020)

So pleased that the first jabs have been done, even if it was at half-past silly o'clock this morning.

Fingers n toes crossed that the rollout proceeds without any hitches.

Plus that the next candidate vaxx gets approved sooner rather than later ...


----------



## 2hats (Dec 8, 2020)

Sunray said:


> Quite a lot of talk regarding how long we are immune to this virus but there is evidence is quite a long time. Antibodies aren’t the only defence mechanism we have
> Why do we develop lifelong immunity to some diseases, but not others?


There is no evidence that it is any longer than about 8-9 months _right now_ in some subjects, because that's as long as it has been studied (longitudinal studies are ongoing). The research cited in the Guardian highlights the shortcomings of many vaccine techniques and platforms (compared to the natural infection cycle) which were touched on much further up thread. It's hypothesised to be about (up to) a year (in healthy individuals) but expected to vary widely from person to person (based on work on similar coronaviridae).


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 8, 2020)

Any idea on whether this COVID-19 vaccine will work on colds? Given that many colds are caused by other coronas. It would be fantastic if it did


----------



## prunus (Dec 8, 2020)

frogwoman said:


> Any idea on whether this COVID-19 vaccine will work on colds? Given that many colds are caused by other coronas. It would be fantastic if it did



It’s unlikely to have much of an effect, as this vaccine is tightly tied to (largely) the structure of SARS-nCoV2’s spike protein, which is significantly different to the ‘common cold’ coronaviruses’ spikes.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 8, 2020)

frogwoman said:


> Any idea on whether this COVID-19 vaccine will work on colds? Given that many colds are caused by other coronas. It would be fantastic if it did


Not the COVID related vaccines per se, but the new vaccine platforms and new research approaches/techniques developed (developing) for the investigation of SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission dynamics.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 8, 2020)

IIRC antibodies for coronas decline pretty quickly so any vaccine will have to stimulate other aspects of the immune system?


----------



## 2hats (Dec 8, 2020)

There is increasing focus on T lymphocytes, CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, and the expression of interferon gamma.


----------



## platinumsage (Dec 8, 2020)

frogwoman said:


> Any idea on whether this COVID-19 vaccine will work on colds? Given that many colds are caused by other coronas. It would be fantastic if it did



Most colds are rhinoviruses, they give the classic mega snot colds. I think coronas only cause about 10% of them, and are more commonly mistaken for flu (fever, coughs etc)


----------



## Cloo (Dec 8, 2020)

I think what's needed now is guidance spelling out 'Ok, now granny's been vaccinated what does this actually mean?' Because a lot of people are going to assume they are now fine to interact with her as normal but it isn't that simple.


----------



## elbows (Dec 8, 2020)

platinumsage said:


> Most colds are rhinoviruses, they give the classic mega snot colds. I think coronas only cause about 10% of them, and are more commonly mistaken for flu (fever, coughs etc)



Due to a relative lack of surveillance, data and historical interest, I think the possible percentage range is quite broad. Sometimes I see 10-15% mentioned as being down to coronaviruses, sometimes 15-30%, sometimes even higher. I think they are fairly confident that rhinoviruses account for up to 50% of colds, but some studies I looked at said that the cause of about 30% of colds is unknown (quite probably viruses we havent yet identified, or issues with tests not always picking up known viruses).

I think two of the four existing known human coronaviruses that have been placed under 'the common cold' are alphacoronaviruses and the other 2 are betacoronaviruses. The pandemic coronavirus is a betacoronavirus.

Hopefully more attention will be paid to this area in future as a result of this pandemic.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 8, 2020)

Cloo said:


> I think what's needed now is guidance spelling out 'Ok, now granny's been vaccinated what does this actually mean?' Because a lot of people are going to assume they are now fine to interact with her as normal but it isn't that simple.



Yes, given we are still looking at months of restrictions of varying types a clear message does need to be communicated beyond _everyone still needs to be vigilant._


----------



## Sunray (Dec 8, 2020)

Cloo said:


> I think what's needed now is guidance spelling out 'Ok, now granny's been vaccinated what does this actually mean?' Because a lot of people are going to assume they are now fine to interact with her as normal but it isn't that simple.



Once we get beyond 50% of the population vaccinated it will be that simple. I'd like everyone to get vaccinated and end wild c-19 but cowards are going to perpetuate the problem.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 8, 2020)

AZD1222 safety and efficacy trial results preprint.


----------



## elbows (Dec 8, 2020)

Sunray said:


> Once we get beyond 50% of the population vaccinated it will be that simple.



Not sure what idea you are basing that on?


----------



## StoneRoad (Dec 8, 2020)

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

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


----------



## belboid (Dec 8, 2020)

2hats said:


> AZD1222 safety and efficacy trial results preprint.


simple version for eejits like to to comprehend - Interim Efficacy Results


----------



## 2hats (Dec 8, 2020)

The paper essentially confirms that information that has already been placed in the public domain via press release. Pretty efficacious from a disease immunity point of view, and fairly safe. Confidence intervals are quite large though and there is, as was suggested, a paucity of information on performance in older cohorts and various ethnic groups. Also no convincing data on transmission limiting potential (to be established in future analyses). Probably sufficient to gain emergency use approval from regulators.


----------



## Supine (Dec 8, 2020)

The difference between taking the vaccine and the placebo. I'll be taking the vaccine thanks. 





			https://www.fda.gov/media/144245/download


----------



## Badgers (Dec 9, 2020)




----------



## ska invita (Dec 9, 2020)

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


----------



## Supine (Dec 9, 2020)

The FDA briefing document for tomorrow's review panel is getting bigger and bigger. Good news is its very supportive so approval shouldnt be an issue. 



			https://www.fda.gov/media/144246/download


----------



## Sunray (Dec 9, 2020)

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 (Dec 9, 2020)

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 (Dec 9, 2020)

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 (Dec 9, 2020)

weltweit said:


> 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 (Dec 9, 2020)

StoneRoad said:


> 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 :




			
				Guardian headline said:
			
		

> *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 (Dec 9, 2020)

ska invita said:


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



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 (Dec 10, 2020)

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 (Dec 10, 2020)

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 (Dec 10, 2020)

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 (Dec 10, 2020)

nyxx said:


> 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 (Dec 10, 2020)

nyxx said:


> 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 (Dec 10, 2020)

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 (Dec 10, 2020)

two sheds said:


> 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 (Dec 10, 2020)

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




			
				Guardian headline said:
			
		

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






			
				Sarah Boseley said:
			
		

> 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 (Dec 10, 2020)

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 (Dec 10, 2020)

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 (Dec 10, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


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


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 (Dec 10, 2020)

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 (Dec 10, 2020)

mx wcfc said:


> 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 (Dec 10, 2020)

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 (Dec 10, 2020)

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 (Dec 10, 2020)

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 (Dec 10, 2020)

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 (Dec 10, 2020)

Cloo said:


> 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 (Dec 10, 2020)

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 (Dec 11, 2020)

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 (Dec 11, 2020)

Cloo said:


> 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 (Dec 11, 2020)

Supine said:


> It's all happening at the moment.
> 
> Sanofi vaccine didn't work well enough so they are going back for more development work
> 
> ...



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 (Dec 11, 2020)

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 (Dec 11, 2020)

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


----------



## teuchter (Dec 11, 2020)

Badgers said:


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


I thought it was more like we don't yet know to what extent this will be the case.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Dec 11, 2020)

Supine said:


> It doesnt impact overall community risk of infection until herd immunity is reached.



I don't think this is the case is it? It doesn't make any sense, to my non-expert mind anyway. 

IF the vaccines prevent transmission then that will kick in as soon as people are vaccinated. Transmission will reduce and the risk to unvaccinated people will decrease (although this will be dependent on behaviour still).The more people are vaccinated then the greater the effect of that will be. There'll be degrees of herd immunity up to the point where true herd immunity is declared, it's not like there'll be one particular point at which the benefits kick in. 

If the vaccines don't provide protection against transmission then there won't be any herd immunity - unvaccinated people will still be just as vulnerable even if the majority of people are protected. Obviously the vaccines will still be vital in reducing deaths but herd immunity will be moot. 

The question is whether the vaccine does provide that protection or not though as far as I can see.


----------



## StoneRoad (Dec 11, 2020)

I'm going to stick my neck out a little.
Based on "them" not knowing if vaccination also prevents transmissions and that they don't want the breakdown in social distancing / mask wearing that would happen if they said it did have that protection / there was herd immunity before it had actually occurred. 
I actually expect them to carry on saying that transmission is not (totally) prevented until the figures show large reductions in all of cases / admissions / deaths .
(and I am especially waiting for the cases to get down to a low level before I start going out on less essential activities).


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Dec 11, 2020)

StoneRoad said:


> I'm going to stick my neck out a little.
> Based on "them" not knowing if vaccination also prevents transmissions and that they don't want the breakdown in social distancing / mask wearing that would happen if they said it did have that protection / there was herd immunity before it had actually occurred.
> I actually expect them to carry on saying that transmission is not (totally) prevented until the figures show large reductions in all of cases / admissions / deaths .
> (and I am especially waiting for the cases to get down to a low level before I start going out on less essential activities).



Yeah I think the messages from the experts will rightly be on the cautious side. They have to be really. Even aside from the basic precautionary principle of not promising anything that might not be the case, there's going to be a big danger as more people get vaccinated and people want to get back to normal life that that happens too soon and makes things a lot worse in the shorter term.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 11, 2020)

This from the man likely responsible for 100,000 deaths himself.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 11, 2020)

Supine said:


> It's all happening at the moment.
> 
> Sanofi vaccine didn't work well enough so they are going back for more development work
> 
> ...






			
				cupid_stunt said:
			
		

> 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.



I agree with this, and in the case of the Sanofi one, they expect to start altered ("stage 2B") trials in February 2021.

Also, with the Sanofi one, it was interesting to read that it looks like they'd used similar-ish (?) methodology (more conventional than the mRSA [edit!! I meant mRNA] method used by Pfizer/NBiotec and Moderna) to Oxford/AstraZeneca.

Which very much underlines cupid's point that those having had or expected to have regulatory approval, represesents *excellent* achievements


----------



## elbows (Dec 11, 2020)

teuchter said:


> I thought it was more like we don't yet know to what extent this will be the case.



Yeah they are just being cautious about that, and its not a good idea to make claims until the evidence is there.

Herd immunity remains nowhere on my radar, and this doesnt change even if I assume that the vaccines will demonstrate the ability to prevent transmission.

This is because the number of people required to be immunised in order to attempt to reach herd immunity levels is very high, especially with vaccines that arent close to offering 100% protection. It would be a really huge challenge to reach that level of immunisation, and would take a long time. So until we know how long the vaccines can protect for, its not even possible to say whether such a plan is in any way feasible. Plus we dont know the extent to which selection pressure on the virus as a result of mass vaccination will lead to the usual phenomenon whereby random virus mutations that happen to result in the evasion of vaccine immune response give that mutated strain an advantage that allows it to become the dominant strain, requiring new versions of vaccines to be developed.

Those are some of the reasons why the orthodox expert expectations for the future will often be along the lines of expecting vaccines to offer us a way to avoid the worst health system implications of this virus, rather than eradicating the disease. Its all about scale, the pandemic ends in the minds of people and states when the implications of the virus for society are radically changed compared to the current situation. And that doest require full population immunity, it requires massive changes to the scale of hospitalisations and deaths. And then it becomes a case of keeping on top of things and managing this virus and its evolution like they manage any other nasty seasonal virus. Other possibilities exist too, but I dont believe in considering them much unless things happen which really point to such alternative paths looking likely to become the new reality.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Dec 11, 2020)

Some promising sounding news on the treatment side: Coronavirus: UK scientists identify drugs that may help severe cases


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 11, 2020)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Some promising sounding news on the treatment side: Coronavirus: UK scientists identify drugs that may help severe cases



Yes, looks promising 
But I'm saving reading it all until I get the paper edition tomorrow ....


----------



## Epona (Dec 11, 2020)

I think one of the things we need to remember about transmission is that the virus survives on certain surfaces (especially cold ones) - so having a vaccine will not necessarily prevent ALL forms of spread - yes it seems likely that it will prevent spread if you yourself having been vaccinated and therefore not being ill cough on someone - the spray from your cough is probably safe.  Similarly, if you have been vaccinated and someone with Covid coughs on you or on something you handle, then you are significantly less likely to become ill.

BUT if someone who has Covid coughs all over the frozen pizza cabinet of your local supermarket and you handle the pizzas and then handle something else, there is a strong chance that even if you have been vaccinated, you will have spread infectious droplets from the pizzas to whatever you touched next (the cola bottles in the supermarket, your partner's hand, your child's face etc.) increasing the risk for anyone who has not yet been vaccinated - so there will still be a need for good hygiene practices and distancing for that reason.  At least for a good amount of time.


----------



## Supine (Dec 11, 2020)

Gene Treatment 









						Covid: Genes hold clues to why some people get severely ill
					

A study has identified genes that provide clues about why some people get seriously ill from Covid-19.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Wilf (Dec 12, 2020)

So, the real oldies get it and that bites right into the mortality figures. Then we move onto vaccinating the oldies and then the nearly 60s like me. All good.

Vs

Kill your nan week, Dec 23-27, along with a further collapse in social distancing around February onwards as people see the vaccine roll out and think the pandemic is over.

So, a few trends within trends are likely to happen over the next 6 months, for both mortality and infection rates.


----------



## Supine (Dec 12, 2020)

Covid: FDA approves Pfizer vaccine for emergency use in US
					

The US Food and Drug Administration gave its approval late on Friday after White House pressure.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## hitmouse (Dec 16, 2020)

Anyone got any opinions on Ivermectin? A friend sent me a link to Dr Kory's testimony to the senate about its effectiveness, looking around a bit I've found this from AP debunking it. Also a letter in the BMJ promoting it. I am absolutely not well-versed enough in the science to be able to judge either way, am happy to accept "insufficient evidence at present" but if anyone has any fuller debunkings I could send to my friend I'd be happy to see them.


----------



## mx wcfc (Dec 16, 2020)

Might be worth following the data here....

Odd to see the UK ahead of the game on something.

@OurWorldInData
⁩’s COVID vaccination page https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations…
https://twitter.com/MaxCRoser/status/1339311180419043330/photo/1


----------



## Supine (Dec 16, 2020)

hitmouse said:


> Anyone got any opinions on Ivermectin? A friend sent me a link to Dr Kory's testimony to the senate about its effectiveness, looking around a bit I've found this from AP debunking it. Also a letter in the BMJ promoting it. I am absolutely not well-versed enough in the science to be able to judge either way, am happy to accept "insufficient evidence at present" but if anyone has any fuller debunkings I could send to my friend I'd be happy to see them.



I've not watched it but this guy can be trusted


----------



## teuchter (Dec 18, 2020)

Russia on the go now, but Scotland still the world leader, as in most things.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 18, 2020)

I was reading that in Russia they are very concerned about vaccine take-up.  Suspicion of government mixed with the same old anti-vax stuff it would seem.


----------



## MrCurry (Dec 19, 2020)

I haven’t been reading anything about the vaccines apart from the occasional BBC News website story, so don‘t really know a thing, but I did hear the vaccination is two jabs, 3 weeks apart. Is there any immunity after the first jab, or only after the second?


----------



## LDC (Dec 19, 2020)

MrCurry said:


> I haven’t been reading anything about the vaccines apart from the occasional BBC News website story, so don‘t really know a thing, but I did hear the vaccination is two jabs, 3 weeks apart. Is there any immunity after the first jab, or only after the second?



Two doses, 28 days apart, some immunity likely after first dose, but maximum immunity 7 days after second dose. (That's my understanding from some reading and doing vaccination training specific to this vaccine being given now.)


----------



## MrCurry (Dec 19, 2020)

Thanks LynnDoyleCooper. Any idea how much “some” is? 5% 25% 40...?


----------



## LDC (Dec 19, 2020)

Not a fucking clue!

Having the vaccine shouldn't change anyone's behavior anyway currently, so it's bit of a moot point really.


----------



## MrCurry (Dec 19, 2020)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Not a fucking clue!
> 
> Having the vaccine shouldn't change anyone's behavior anyway currently, so it's bit of a moot point really.


It’s not moot to me - I’m in Sweden, my parents are in Uk and they’re getting their first jab tomorrow. I want to know how worried I should be about them going to my sister’s for Christmas, as I need to decide how hard I’m going to lobby them to wait the extra month and have their get together end of Jan.

But I’m not having a go at you, just saying I have a reason for asking.


----------



## LDC (Dec 19, 2020)

Great they're getting their jab! Yeah, didn't take it as a go, I'll have a look about if I get the chance.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 19, 2020)

MrCurry said:


> It’s not moot to me - I’m in Sweden, my parents are in Uk and they’re getting their first jab tomorrow. I want to know how worried I should be about them going to my sister’s for Christmas, as I need to decide how hard I’m going to lobby them to wait the extra month and have their get together end of Jan.



Depends where they & your sister lives, London & much of the SE has just gone into tier 4, meaning no households/existing bubbles mixing with any other over Christmas.

Tiers 1-3 can still mix, but only on Christmas Day, not over 5 days as planned.


----------



## Supine (Dec 19, 2020)

MrCurry said:


> Thanks LynnDoyleCooper. Any idea how much “some” is? 5% 25% 40...?



Hi, this data from the FDA submission indicated ten days from the first injection is where the benefit starts. For % look at how the blue and red diverge from each other


----------



## MrCurry (Dec 20, 2020)

Thanks all


----------



## 8ball (Dec 20, 2020)

Supine said:


> Hi, this data from the FDA submission indicated ten days from the first injection is where the benefit starts. For % look at how the blue and red diverge from each other
> 
> View attachment 244294



This could likely vary significantly by individual, though, so I wouldn't rely on it in terms of individual decisions around anyone's behaviour.


----------



## Shechemite (Dec 20, 2020)

Hoping this legal challenge succeeds. Covid-19: Adults with learning disabilities should have priority access to vaccination, say lawyers


----------



## rubbershoes (Dec 20, 2020)

2 of my doctor friends have had their vaccinations. Their families are very relieved


----------



## Lord Camomile (Dec 21, 2020)

Bit of a hoo-ha brewing in the States.

A lot of people criticising Marco Rubio for "jumping the queue" and getting vaccinated. Meanwhile, AOC has _also _had the vaccine, seemingly in an effort to destigmatise/demystify it (which is fairly consistent with other stuff she's done).

So, is one right, one wrong? Are politicians leading by example by getting the vaccination, or are they jumping the queue?

(Obviously some of the ire against Rubio is that he's been claiming "hoax" and all that stuff for most of 2020, but has now jumped on a vaccine...)


----------



## Cloo (Dec 21, 2020)

Bit concerned to hear from a neighbour that her elderly mum got a call about her vaccination, but nothing in writing (understandable considering urgency) - her mum had to write down address, date and time. This is a worry for my 92-year-old step-grandma, as she's partially sighted and her memory's going, so it could be a challenge for her to write details down and remember it if they don't catch her on a good day. I think her daughter has taken to leaving notes (in large writing) by her mum's phone to remind her of stuff so maybe she needs a 'Phone A when you get the vaccination time' reminder to make sure someone else has details. There must be plenty of older folks like her living alone or with partners with similar issues who may miss out if they have to write it down themselves.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Dec 21, 2020)

Lord Camomile said:


> Bit of a hoo-ha brewing in the States.
> 
> A lot of people criticising Marco Rubio for "jumping the queue" and getting vaccinated. Meanwhile, AOC has _also _had the vaccine, seemingly in an effort to destigmatise/demystify it (which is fairly consistent with other stuff she's done).
> 
> ...



I think it will probably help to dampen some of the anti vax stuff tbh so a good thing, even though I obviously wouldn't trust his motives at all.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 21, 2020)




----------



## Indeliblelink (Dec 22, 2020)

Article about why we might be seeing relatively higher incidents of allergic reaction to the Pfizer vaccine.




__





						Science | AAAS
					






					www.sciencemag.org
				





> Severe allergy-like reactions in at least eight people who received the COVID-19 vaccine produced by Pfizer and BioNTech over the past 2 weeks may be due to a compound in the packaging of the messenger RNA (mRNA) that forms the vaccine’s main ingredient, scientists say. A similar mRNA vaccine developed by Moderna, which was authorized for emergency use in the United States on Friday, also contains the compound, polyethylene glycol (PEG).
> ....
> Some allergists and immunologists believe a small number of people previously exposed to PEG may have high levels of antibodies against PEG, putting them at risk of an anaphylactic reaction to the vaccine.


----------



## Supine (Dec 22, 2020)

PEG is contained in lots of things. There are always a small number of people who react badly to any chemical. I wouldn't be undue concerned about this vaccine.


----------



## Indeliblelink (Dec 22, 2020)

I'm not particularly concerned, I just find the science interesting.


----------



## Chilli.s (Dec 22, 2020)

Aged parents booked in for vaccination (part 1) next week


----------



## teuchter (Dec 23, 2020)

Scotland still world-beating:


----------



## platinumsage (Dec 24, 2020)

It's looking increasingly foolish for the government to have fucked off the Moderna vaccine. If we'd had that now we could be proceeding at a much faster rate.


----------



## platinumsage (Dec 24, 2020)

Latest vaccination data:



			https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/12/COVID-19-total-announced-vaccinations-24-December-2020.pdf
		


521,594 people vaccinated,  366,715  of which were over 80 (there are 3.2 million over 80s in the UK)


----------



## Boudicca (Dec 24, 2020)

My lodger, who works in NHS Admin, has just told me that their IT guy has had a Covid jab 'because he moves around a lot'.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 24, 2020)

platinumsage said:


> ..
> 521,594 people vaccinated,  366,715  of which were over 80 (there are 3.2 million over 80s in the UK)


That doesn't sound like much more than they already announced, they said they did 500,000 already days ago ..


----------



## teuchter (Dec 24, 2020)

weltweit said:


> That doesn't sound like much more than they already announced, they said they did 500,000 already days ago ..


That data was for whole of UK I think. What platinumsage posted is just England. Scotland seems to be quite far ahead.


----------



## Cloo (Dec 24, 2020)

Cloo said:


> Bit concerned to hear from a neighbour that her elderly mum got a call about her vaccination, but nothing in writing (understandable considering urgency) - her mum had to write down address, date and time. This is a worry for my 92-year-old step-grandma, as she's partially sighted and her memory's going, so it could be a challenge for her to write details down and remember it if they don't catch her on a good day. I think her daughter has taken to leaving notes (in large writing) by her mum's phone to remind her of stuff so maybe she needs a 'Phone A when you get the vaccination time' reminder to make sure someone else has details. There must be plenty of older folks like her living alone or with partners with similar issues who may miss out if they have to write it down themselves.


My mum told me this morning that step-grandma has receivied her vaccine - very luckily her daughter was there when they called about it so she got to the vaccination and her daughter has details for second dose so she won't miss that.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 24, 2020)

platinumsage said:


> It's looking increasingly foolish *for the government to have fucked off the Moderna vaccine*. If we'd had that now we could be proceeding at a much faster rate.



I must have missed out on this -- have the Government sacked getting any of the Moderna vaccine, then? 

I thought I'd read that the UK Government had at least seven million doses on order -- admittedly that's a pretty limited total, but still!


----------



## platinumsage (Dec 24, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> I must have missed out on this -- have the Government sacked getting any of the Moderna vaccine, then?
> 
> I thought I'd read that the UK Government had at least seven million doses on order -- admittedly that's a pretty limited total, but still!



Unlike the other vaccines they bought, they acquired the Moderna one very late, after the trial results, and we consequently won’t get any until April. The US is already giving it to people.

Now is when we need it, when the rollout rate is limited by the available vaccine and not by the staff to administer it etc. By April we‘ll have lots of vaccines to go around so it’ll be of limited utility, plus thousands more people will be dead by then.


----------



## Supine (Dec 24, 2020)

To be fair to the gov they bought into lots of potential vaccines and they invested money into all of the major science platforms used to develop them. Moderna has done well but they had no history and looked like an outside shot only a few months ago.


----------



## Supine (Dec 25, 2020)

May be of interest to some:

The official ingredients of the Pfizer / BioNTech vaccine with their functions:

𝐀𝐂𝐓𝐈𝐕𝐄 𝐈𝐍𝐆𝐑𝐄𝐃𝐈𝐄𝐍𝐓
- nucleoside-modified messenger RNA (modRNA) encoding the viral spike glycoprotein (S) of SARS-CoV-2

RNA is a template to produce a specific protein. In the vaccine, this message tells our cells to produce the viral protein that will trigger the immune response to the virus.

𝐋𝐈𝐏𝐈𝐃𝐒

(4-hydroxybutyl)azanediyl)bis(hexane-6,1-diyl)bis (ALC-3015)
(2- hexyldecanoate),2-[(polyethylene glycol)-2000]-N,N-ditetradecylacetamide (ALC-0159)
1,2-distearoyl-snglycero-3-phosphocholine (DSPC)
Cholesterol

These are fancy words for 4 different fatty molecules. These assemble into capsules that contain the RNA. These fats aid in delivery and protection of the RNA.

𝐒𝐀𝐋𝐓𝐒

potassium chloride
monobasic potassium phosphate
sodium chloride
basic sodium phosphate dihydrate

Again, fancy words for 4 salts. This formula is actually phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), a common buffer. This normalizes the pH of the vaccine.

𝐒𝐔𝐆𝐀𝐑
- sucrose

Just sugar! It is a cryoprotectant to ensure the lipids don't get too sticky in ultra-cold storage.


----------



## souljacker (Dec 25, 2020)

Boudicca said:


> My lodger, who works in NHS Admin, has just told me that their IT guy has had a Covid jab 'because he moves around a lot'.



Good stuff. I've worked with quite a few trusts in England and the IT staff are pretty much the only people in a hospital who need to go everywhere. We don't want them running around infecting the whole place.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 25, 2020)

Supine said:


> May be of interest to some:
> 
> The official ingredients of the Pfizer / BioNTech vaccine with their functions:
> 
> ...


Goes into garden shed equipped with chemicals and test tubes - how hard can it be?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 26, 2020)

This possible new treatment sounds promising, the idea being that it could be given to people who have been exposed to SARS-Cov-2, to prevent it developing into covid-19. Subject to the trials going well and approval, it could be an important addition to the expanding toolkit in the flight against this fucker.   



> British scientists are trialling a new drug that could prevent someone who has been exposed to coronavirus from going on to develop the disease Covid-19, which experts say could save many lives.
> 
> The antibody therapy would confer instant immunity against the disease and could be given as an emergency treatment to hospital inpatients and care home residents to help contain outbreaks.
> 
> People living in households where someone has caught Covid could be injected with the drug to ensure they do not become infected too. It could also be given to university students, among whom the virus has spread rapidly because they live, study and socialise together.





> Dr Catherine Houlihan, a virologist at University College London Hospitals NHS trust (UCLH) who is leading a study called Storm Chaser into the drug, said: “If we can prove that this treatment works and prevent people who are exposed to the virus going on to develop Covid-19, it would be an exciting addition to the arsenal of weapons being developed to fight this dreadful virus.,”
> 
> The drug has been developed by UCLH and AstraZeneca, the pharmaceutical company that has also, along with Oxford University, created a vaccine that the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency is expected to approve for use in Britain next week.
> 
> The team hope the trial shows that the cocktail of antibodies protects against Covid-19 for between six and 12 months. Trial participants are receiving it as two doses, one after the other. If it is approved, it would be offered to someone who has been exposed to Covid in the previous eight days.











						UK scientists trial drug to prevent infection that leads to Covid
					

Exclusive: Antibody therapy could confer instant immunity to Covid-19 on at-risk groups




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## platinumsage (Dec 26, 2020)

Supine said:


> To be fair to the gov they bought into lots of potential vaccines and they invested money into all of the major science platforms used to develop them. Moderna has done well but they had no history and looked like an outside shot only a few months ago.



It certainly didn't look like an outside shot which is why the US and EU both bought into the Moderna vaccine early on.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Dec 26, 2020)

Lord Camomile said:


> So, is one right, one wrong? Are politicians leading by example by getting the vaccination, or are they jumping the queue?


I have no issue with politicians doing this - given the amount of scepticism about vaccines, it's important that people in public office lead by example.  Compare that with Blair's reluctance to confirm one of his kids had had MMR - that was bloody stupid.


weltweit said:


> Goes into garden shed equipped with chemicals and test tubes - how hard can it be?


Don't forget to add the secret 5G microchips otherwise it won't work.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 26, 2020)

Interesting summary here: 









						Ten reasons why we got Covid-19 vaccines so quickly without 'cutting corners' | Adam Finn
					

Speedy rollout is thanks to a combination of foresight, hard work and lucky breaks, says Prof Adam Finn




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 26, 2020)

two sheds said:


> Interesting summary here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The above is excellent, and about the most positive summary of the vaccine-development process that I've read so far  

Science = cool as fuck  

Anti-science (aka "vaccine-scepticism"  ) = uncool to the end of any known horizon


----------



## 2hats (Dec 27, 2020)

AZ CEO claims AZD1222 found to have 95% efficacy and be 100% protective against severe illness in latest trial where optimal dosing regime has been established. Regulatory approval expected later this week.


> The coronavirus vaccine developed by Oxford University and Astra Zeneca is expected to win approval this week as the head of the drugs giant said it “should be” effective against the highly transmissible new strain of the virus.
> 
> Senior government officials expect the drugs watchdog to give the green light before Thursday, speeding up the provision of the jab to the 15m people who could end up in hospital if they caught the virus.
> 
> Astra Zeneca’s chief executive, Pascal Soriot, today reveals that new data will show the vaccine is as effective as the Pfizer and Moderna jabs that have already been approved, protecting 95% of patients, and is “100% effective” in preventing severe illness requiring hospital treatment.











						Covid vaccine boost for millions as hospitals near breaking point
					

The coronavirus vaccine developed by Oxford University and Astra Zeneca is expected to win approval this week as the head of the drugs giant said it “should be”




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## 2hats (Dec 28, 2020)

Further phase 3 trials of the Novavax NVX-CoV2373 recombinant spike protein vaccine in the US and Mexico. (May end up being the fourth vaccine to be widely approved).








						Novavax Investor Relations - Press Releases & Statements
					






					ir.novavax.com


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 28, 2020)

2hats said:


> Further phase 3 trials of the Novavax NVX-CoV2373 recombinant spike protein vaccine in the US and Mexico. (May end up being the fourth vaccine to be widely approved).
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I really like a level of scientific detail that non-scientists like me have to work hard to understand. It's reassuring


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 30, 2020)

Oxford vaccine approved at last.  

This should be a game changer, not just for the UK, but the world.











						COVID-19: Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine to be rolled out from Monday - but Britons warned against behaving with 'wild abandon'
					

Health Secretary Matt Hancock told Sky News it will start to be rolled out from 4 January.




					news.sky.com


----------



## Supine (Dec 30, 2020)

Fantastic news. Really interesting they seem to be going with a one dose strategy to start with. Second shot within 12 weeks should get a lot more people protected in Q1 next year.


----------



## platinumsage (Dec 30, 2020)

Also important to note the following as people are mentioning that it's not a very effective vaccine compared to Pfizer's and Moderna's:

"...the primary efficacy endpoint based on a pooled analysis showed that the vaccine was 70.4% (confidence interval: 54.8% to 80.6%) effective at preventing symptomatic COVID-19 occurring more than 14 days after receiving two doses of the vaccine. A secondary efficacy endpoint of prevention of severe disease demonstrated *no cases of severe infections or hospitalisations in the vaccine group*."





__





						AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine authorised for emergency supply in the UK
					






					www.astrazeneca.com


----------



## Artaxerxes (Dec 30, 2020)

rubbershoes said:


> 2 of my doctor friends have had their vaccinations. Their families are very relieved



Wife got her first dose this morning after lucking out and getting the email opening slots for it just as she was leaving work.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 30, 2020)

Giving it the glass half empty vibe, I wonder what the more scientifically minded of yous think about it being the 2 x full dose version getting approval? I understand the .5 + 1 dose is in further tests, so can't be given yet, which is all good and proper. Same time there seems to be a significant difference in efficacy (90+% Vs 70% in rough figures). 

Needless to say I'll be having the vaccine when I offered - I'll be 60 soon - which will likely be the Oxford version. Suppose I'm thinking about it purely at the level of what it does to your day to day life/behaviour/psychology.  If you got to a point where the majority of the population had 90% protection, that starts to feel like 'normal life', even with some ongoing social distancing. 70% less so.


----------



## elbows (Dec 30, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Giving it the glass half empty vibe, I wonder what the more scientifically minded of yous think about it being the 2 x full dose version getting approval? I understand the .5 + 1 dose is in further tests, so can't be given yet, which is all good and proper. Same time there seems to be a significant difference in efficacy (90+% Vs 70% in rough figures).
> 
> Needless to say I'll be having the vaccine when I offered - I'll be 60 soon - which will likely be the Oxford version. Suppose I'm thinking about it purely at the level of what it does to your day to day life/behaviour/psychology.  If you got to a point where the majority of the population had 90% protection, that starts to feel like 'normal life', even with some ongoing social distancing. 70% less so.



I'd probably take a similar stance to the MHRA to start with, data isnt good enough and other possible explanations for the better results exist.

As for feelings and equations relating to what percentage of the population has what level of protection via vaccination, such things are not on my radar at all at this stage. Its getting too far ahead of things for my liking, especially when we dont currently have a vaccination plan that involves healthy people under 50. I have to wait till we get to see for ourselves what various levels of vaccination do to things like hospital admissions.


----------



## Supine (Dec 30, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Giving it the glass half empty vibe, I wonder what the more scientifically minded of yous think about it being the 2 x full dose version getting approval? I understand the .5 + 1 dose is in further tests, so can't be given yet, which is all good and proper. Same time there seems to be a significant difference in efficacy (90+% Vs 70% in rough figures).


 
The .5 dose wasnt planned so no suprise it isn't the approved dosage. 

IMO the problem you have when talking about percentages is that they vary a great deal with small data. Random variation could easily change 70% effective to 80 or 90%. I wouldn't worry about which dosage regime or which manufacturers vaccine gives the best results. Time will tell but for now it seems they all work rather well.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 30, 2020)

Supine said:


> The .5 dose wasnt planned so no suprise it isn't the approved dosage.
> 
> IMO the problem you have when talking about percentages is that they vary a great deal with small data. Random variation could easily change 70% effective to 80 or 90%. I wouldn't worry about which dosage regime or which manufacturers vaccine gives the best results. Time will tell but for now it seems they all work rather well.


Yeah, absolutely in terms of it being the right decision. Supposed I'm just saying that if the difference is really 70% Vs 90% there will be significant differences in terms of how it plays out long term. Both in terms of population level protection and also the subjective reality of day to day life once vaccinated.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 31, 2020)

Latest Moderna (mRNA-1273) trial results (randomised, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled) with over 30k participants. After a 2 dose regimen (28 days apart) a vaccine efficacy of 94.1% (95%CI: 89.3-96.8) was observed. No episodes of severe illness were seen in the non-placebo group.
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2035389


----------



## platinumsage (Dec 31, 2020)

243,039 vaccinated in England last week, adding to the 521,594  done in the 13 days prior to that.



			https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/12/COVID-19-total-announced-vaccinations-31-December-2020.pdf


----------



## Indeliblelink (Dec 31, 2020)

__





						Update: China approves first self-developed COVID-19 vaccine - Xinhua | English.news.cn
					





					www.xinhuanet.com
				



China has approved it's self made vaccine saying it had 79.34% efficacy in a phase III study and was safe, although under emergency use rules it's already given out 4.5 million doses. The vaccine uses a chemically inactivated version of the entire virus  and is made by Beijing Biological Products Institute, a division of China National Biotec Group (CNBG), part of state-owned Sinopharm.


----------



## platinumsage (Dec 31, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, absolutely in terms of it being the right decision. Supposed I'm just saying that if the difference is really 70% Vs 90% there will be significant differences in terms of how it plays out long term. Both in terms of population level protection and also the subjective reality of day to day life once vaccinated.



Not really, both are just as effective at preventing severe disease and hospitalisations. The criteria for judging mild cases is different across different vaccine studies, so you can’t make direct comparisons.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 2, 2021)

Has this been posted?








						Britain Opens Door to Mix-and-Match Vaccinations, Worrying Experts (Published 2021)
					

If a second dose of one vaccine isn’t available, another may be substituted, according to the guidelines.




					www.nytimes.com
				




Comment on twitter says " [the mix and match policy has] been in place since November and not a single journalist here has asked questions about it and the government hasn't bothered to explain why they think this will be effective "
It does sound like the next government unnecessary and avoidable fuck up


----------



## Badgers (Jan 2, 2021)




----------



## Wilf (Jan 2, 2021)

ska invita said:


> Has this been posted?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Was just about to post about that:
England health officials defend contingency plan to mix Covid vaccines | World news | The Guardian
Needless to say, I don't know whether this is risky, but that's the point, they are announcing a strategy before _they _know whether it is safe/efficacious. Added to the shift in 2nd dose times it just doesn't build confidence in the vaccine programme.  A, ahem, shot in the arm for ant-vax loons.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 2, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Was just about to post about that:
> England health officials defend contingency plan to mix Covid vaccines | World news | The Guardian
> Needless to say, I don't know whether this is risky, but that's the point, they are announcing a strategy before _they _know whether it is safe/efficacious. Added to the shift in 2nd dose times it just doesn't build confidence in the vaccine programme.  A, ahem, shot in the arm for ant-vax loons.


i can see the logic (spread it out more thinly and hope it does more good more quickly overall) but its the kind of bodge it idea i'd come up with and rely on more responsible people to say NO DO IT PROPERLY


----------



## platinumsage (Jan 2, 2021)

ska invita said:


> i can see the logic (spread it out more thinly and hope it does more good more quickly overall) but its the kind of bodge it idea i'd come up with and rely on more responsible people to say NO DO IT PROPERLY



There's no indication that e.g. Pfizer's 3-week gap is "properly", it's just the period that happened to be used in the trials. 

You could argue that to do it "properly" is to use the data and tools we currently have to reduce death and serious illness as much as possible, in which case the JCVI method is the correct one, despite protestations form the manufacturer and overworked GPs.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 2, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> There's no indication that e.g. Pfizer's 3-week gap is "properly", it's just the period that happened to be used in the trials.
> 
> You could argue that to do it "properly" is to use the data and tools we currently have to reduce death and serious illness as much as possible, in which case the JCVI method is the correct one, despite protestations form the manufacturer and overworked GPs.


But yes, it *is *the period used in the trials. None of this may make any difference or produce ill effects, but it just feels like it's been procedure, procedure, procedure, all along, then suddenly we've shifted to best guesses.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 2, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> There's no indication that e.g. Pfizer's 3-week gap is "properly", it's just the period that happened to be used in the trials.
> 
> You could argue that to do it "properly" is to use the data and tools we currently have to reduce death and serious illness as much as possible, in which case the JCVI method is the correct one, despite protestations form the manufacturer and overworked GPs.


Its not just the period, it's mixing up the different vaccines


----------



## StoneRoad (Jan 2, 2021)

Are they doing a proper study of this mix n match of the vaccines ?


----------



## 2hats (Jan 2, 2021)




----------



## ska invita (Jan 2, 2021)

StoneRoad said:


> Are they doing a proper study of this mix n match of the vaccines ?


Yeah, testing it live on us and seeing what happens.


----------



## platinumsage (Jan 2, 2021)

ska invita said:


> Its not just the period, it's mixing up the different vaccines



I covered that here:









						How would you prioritise the vaccine schedule?
					

I dunno, if it says on the box 'two doses' then people should be given two doses. I certainly don't trust Hancock to make the call that second doses aren't needed.  A single dose reduces the severity of the disease and single dosed vulnerable people are much less likely to die. So the...




					www.urban75.net


----------



## LDC (Jan 2, 2021)

ska invita said:


> Yeah, testing it live on us and seeing what happens.



No, the 'mix and match' thing is not for any standard use at all. It's for very limited exceptional circumstances (supply chain disruption for example) where someone needs a second dose but the same one they had as a first dose isn't available and they're clinically vulnerable for example, or maybe a healthcare worker or someone where no record of what vaccine they had first, then it's been approved that they could have a dose from another approved vaccine. It effectively is really two single doses of different vaccines rather than seeing it as mixing the doses up.

The news had someone on today nearly crying that their second vaccine dose had been cancelled and the reason they gave was they felt like their lives being back to normal was so close and had been suddenly taken away from them. FFS, nobody is going to be 'back to normal' life after their second dose now, why was the news was entertaining this kind of nonsense unchallenged? Some of the narratives around the vaccine are really unhelpful, and that's partly what's fueling the annoyance over the second doses being delayed. One dose is fine, we're all still going to be social distancing and mask wearing the rest of this year either way, and more people with one dose sooner will be better for all.

I think people are being a bit daft over some of this vaccine stuff and it's starting to smack of knee-jerk fear and fear mongering from a few headlines rather than anything more.


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 2, 2021)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> No, the 'mix and match' thing is not for any standard use at all. It's for very limited exceptional circumstances (supply chain disruption for example) where someone needs a second dose but the same one they had as a first dose isn't available and they're clinically vulnerable for example, or maybe a healthcare worker or someone where no record of what vaccine they had first, then it's been approved that they could have a dose from another approved vaccine. It effectively is really two single doses of different vaccines rather than seeing it as mixing the doses up.


Does this mean that they could get a third dose of one or other of the vaccines then?


----------



## LDC (Jan 2, 2021)

I think that's so far off where we are fuck knows tbh. Although it again would be something different. Like next year someone might get a new vaccine to cover them again after the immunity from this years one has faded. Like my flu vaccine is different every year, it's not like my 27th different vaccine dose if that makes sense?


----------



## elbows (Jan 2, 2021)

2hats said:


>




I dont mind admitting that I am very nervous about the giddy, clumsy rush towards mass vaccination as a silver bullet that ends the nightmare, that governments and people in general have been embracing in various different ways for a month or so.

Maybe it will all be fine. But I certainly worry that a crude stance that does not involve a joined up approach, lacking genuine attempts to minimise levels of infection at all times, is really inviting a cruel pandemic lesson of epic proportions about how silver bullets may be sidestepped by the virus.

I do not have a means of estimating the chanes of any of these scenarios coming to pass. But I'm certainly not happy that the whole theme of vaccination seems to be used inappropriately to try to cope with the grim realities of an explosion in cases on top of the existing autumn/winter wave. I dont like mad dashes. I fear a variety of counterproductive outcomes. They might get away without these fears coming to pass, in which case I shall breath a rather large sigh of relief.

As for the rant by that virologist, I enjoyed it, although I probably dont need to tell anyone that I dont agree with the bit about 'hospitals, where onward transmission would presumably be rare'. If forced to presume, I would presume the opposite!


----------



## teuchter (Jan 2, 2021)

The virologist seems to be saying that delaying second doses is increasing the likelihood that vaccine-evading variants will arise. Or have I misunderstood?


----------



## BigMoaner (Jan 2, 2021)

honeslty think that most people, whether they know it or not, are traumatised by this - we have all been in prisons with invisible bars for so long. It's certainly affected my thinking, even in just subtle ways. I thank God or whatever for the scientists we have been working on this - people who know their stuff inside out. Just awe and humility toward them. Can you imagine if they *weren't there???  *but with this trauma that we have all felt, no matter how severe, i just worry that even the people who shoudl have their hands on the wheels are not affected and it's affecting them too. It feels like things are just getting worse and worse.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 2, 2021)

teuchter said:


> The virologist seems to be saying that delaying second doses is increasing the likelihood that vaccine-evading variants will arise. Or have I misunderstood?


He's presenting it as a potential risk, yes. 

It's probably an exaggeration to say that it's like when the doctor insists that you finish the course of antibiotics, but you can see how limited, rather than overwhelming, immunity might actually assist mutations of the virus that can leap the comparatively low bar of partial immunity, with all that implies.


----------



## mx wcfc (Jan 2, 2021)

BigMoaner said:


> honeslty think that most people, whether they know it or not, are traumatised by this - we have all been in prisons with invisible bars for so long. It's certainly affected my thinking, even in just subtle ways. I thank God or whatever for the scientists we have been working on this - people who know their stuff inside out. Just awe and humility toward them. Can you imagine if they *weren't there???  *but with this trauma that we have all felt, no matter how severe, i just worry that even the people who shoudl have their hands on the wheels are not affected and it's affecting them too. It feels like things are just getting worse and worse.


I hear you.  I don't thank god for anything,  I thank the scientists for their expertise and work.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 2, 2021)

mx wcfc said:


> I hear you.  I don't thank god for anything,  I thank the scientists for their expertise and work.


I also thank the scientists for, despite having grown up in an era where science was monetised and seen increasingly in terms of what it can put in someone's pocket, they were prepared to pursue their passions, often in thankless fields, to the point that they could deliver on a challenge like this. There's a lot to be said for bloody-mindedness.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 3, 2021)




----------



## scifisam (Jan 3, 2021)

Epona said:


> I think one of the things we need to remember about transmission is that the virus survives on certain surfaces (especially cold ones) - so having a vaccine will not necessarily prevent ALL forms of spread - yes it seems likely that it will prevent spread if you yourself having been vaccinated and therefore not being ill cough on someone - the spray from your cough is probably safe.  Similarly, if you have been vaccinated and someone with Covid coughs on you or on something you handle, then you are significantly less likely to become ill.
> 
> BUT if someone who has Covid coughs all over the frozen pizza cabinet of your local supermarket and you handle the pizzas and then handle something else, there is a strong chance that even if you have been vaccinated, you will have spread infectious droplets from the pizzas to whatever you touched next (the cola bottles in the supermarket, your partner's hand, your child's face etc.) increasing the risk for anyone who has not yet been vaccinated - so there will still be a need for good hygiene practices and distancing for that reason.  At least for a good amount of time.



Can you provide a link for that, please?

I mean, good hygiene practices should be encouraged, but other than that, I'm not sure what you're saying.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

Really?  It's not rocket science.  Let me make it simpler.  If someone with coronavirus hawks up a load of coronavirus infected phlegm (or just saliva droplets from their cough) all over the contents of a freezer cabinet in the supermarket where the virus may survive for several days alive and I go pick up a pizza, put it back, and then handle other stuff in the supermarket without sanitising my hands in between, then my immune status only matters in terms of me myself getting ill - it doesn't magically kill any virus that I may have picked up on my hands from the freezer cabinet and spread to tins of beans, bottles of cola, the button on the pedestrian crossing, handrails on the bus etc.

It might be easier to visualise if you imagine that coronavirus infected droplets as like putting your hand in wet paint and spreading it around the place when you touch other things with that wet paint on your hands. Just because you didn't get infected doesn't mean you aren't spreading it around via contact.  This is where handwashing is fantastic!

This is how the majority of colds/flu etc spreads, it isn't a new thing.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 3, 2021)

Epona said:


> Really?  It's not rocket science.  Let me make it simpler.  If someone with coronavirus hawks up a load of coronavirus infected phlegm all over the contents of a freezer cabinet in the supermarket where the virus may survive for several days alive and I go pick up a pizza, put it back, and then handle other stuff in the supermarket without sanitising my hands in between, then my immune status only matters in terms of me myself getting ill - it doesn't magically kill any virus that I may have picked up on my hands from the freezer cabinet and spread to tins of beans, bottles of cola, the button on the pedestrian crossing, handrails on the bus etc.



Okaaaay... That doesn't align with anything I've read about fomite transmission for covid 19. There's no "magic" involved. Your personal opinion isn't a cite, sorry.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

OK so if you have coronavirus and cough all over something and then someone else touches what you just coughed over and then touches their face they must be totally safe, by your reckoning.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

Or if person A with coronavirus coughs over something, person B touches that something and gets person A's saliva on their hands.  Person B is vaccinated but they then go shake hands with person C who isn't vaccinated without washing their hands.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

I think I must have just been explaining what I meant poorly for it not to be understood.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 3, 2021)

Epona said:


> OK so if you have coronavirus and cough all over something and then someone else touches what you just coughed over and then touches their face they must be totally safe, by your reckoning.



Nah, if it were that quick - someone coughs on something, then someone touches it straight away - then possibly it could transmit. Even then the studies say it's unlikely. It's not transmitted that way.

After several days, it's even less likely. 

If it transmitted like that, we'd be way more fucked than we are now.


----------



## Supine (Jan 3, 2021)

Vaccination reduces the number of people who can potentially 'cough all over the freezer food'.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

Supine said:


> Vaccination reduces the number of people who can potentially 'cough all over the freezer food'.



Yes indeed, the higher percentage of the population who are vaccinated the better, obviously.

I didn't expect to be ripped apart for suggesting that people who had been vaccinated still ought to wash their hands regularly however.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

Also there was plenty of advice early on about using antibac or alcohol based cleaner on food packaging when it had been delivered or picked up from the supermarket, was all that a complete waste of time then?

(Bear in mind that COVID cases are higher now in my borough than they were during the first peak, excuse me for wanting to be more careful rather than blasé about it)


----------



## scifisam (Jan 3, 2021)

Epona said:


> Yes indeed, the higher percentage of the population who are vaccinated the better, obviously.
> 
> I didn't expect to be ripped apart for suggesting that people who had been vaccinated still ought to wash their hands regularly however.



You weren't ripped apart. One person, me, asked for a link, and I meant it genuinely. I'm pre-disposed to think that fomite transmission is unlikely, based on what I've read before, but information changes all the time, and I want to know what that information is.

And your "suggestion" was not that people should wash their hands regularly. You said that frozen pizza boxes could still transmit the virus. What I questioned was that fomite transmission was as big a factor as you claimed.

 I'd still like to know if you actually have any credible links saying that fomite transmission occurs.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

scifisam said:


> You weren't ripped apart. One person, me, asked for a link, and I meant it genuinely. I'm pre-disposed to think that fomite transmission is unlikely, based on what I've read before, but information changes all the time, and I want to know what that information is.
> 
> And your "suggestion" was not that people should wash their hands regularly. You said that frozen pizza boxes could still transmit the virus. What I questioned was that fomite transmission was as big a factor as you claimed.
> 
> I'd still like to know if you actually have any credible links saying that fomite transmission occurs.



I wasn't aware that fomite transmission DIDN'T occur, because everything I have read in the news about washing your hands and sanitising between touching items in the supermarket indicates that it does.

Please provide a link that proves there is no fomite transmission, because that goes against everything I have heard so far.

I am really sorry if you misinterpreted or misunderstood my post, I do have significant communication issues and I am feeling really picked on right now.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 3, 2021)

Epona said:


> I wasn't aware that fomite transmission DIDN'T occur, because everything I have read in the news about washing your hands and sanitising between touching items in the supermarket indicates that it does.
> 
> Please provide a link that proves there is no fomite transmission, because that goes against everything I have heard so far.
> 
> I am really sorry if you misinterpreted or misunderstood my post, I do have significant communication issues and I am feeling really picked on right now.



I'm sorry if you're feeling picked on. I'm not sure why for this particular thread, but I understand the feeling.

We could get into a cite war, especially since you made the assertion that covid lives on even frozen surfaces, so really it's down to you to provide proof, not me. But this is the real world, and we both  want people to actually know stuff.

Anyway, OK, here's one example of scientists saying that fomite transmission is neligible:









						Low risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission by fomites in real-life conditions
					

We read with interest the Comment by Emanuel Goldman1 highlighting experiments done under controlled laboratory conditions that suggest persistence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on inanimate surfaces for days, with potential implications for viral transmission.2...



					www.thelancet.com
				






> We have done two sequential studies seeking to determine on one hand the extent, if any, of contamination of inanimate surfaces in a standard infectious disease ward of a major referral hospital in northern Italy, and on the other hand whether the risk of contamination was higher in emergency rooms and sub-intensive care wards than on ordinary wards. Cleaning procedures were standard. A number of objects and surfaces were swabbed. Remarkably, only the continuous positive airway pressure helmet of one patient was positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. More importantly, attempts to culture the positive swabs on Vero E6 cells were unsuccessful, suggesting that patient fomites and surfaces are not contaminated with viable virus. Our findings suggest that environmental contamination leading to SARS-CoV-2 transmission is unlikely to occur in real-life conditions, provided that standard cleaning procedures and precautions are enforced. These data would support Goldman's point that the chance of transmission through inanimate surfaces is less frequent than hitherto recognised.



There are tons of others.

I could see there being a transmission via someone sneezing on a pizza and then someone else picking it up, but that involves two people in close contact with aerosol transmission. 

And yes, it seems like some of the handwashing advice was pointless WRT covid. But I think it helped usher people - in the UK, anyway - towards wearing masks, though, and that does seem to help.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 3, 2021)

Epona said:


> I wasn't aware that fomite transmission DIDN'T occur, because everything I have read in the news about washing your hands and sanitising between touching items in the supermarket indicates that it does.
> 
> Please provide a link that proves there is no fomite transmission, because that goes against everything I have heard so far.
> 
> I am really sorry if you misinterpreted or misunderstood my post, I do have significant communication issues and I am feeling really picked on right now.



In the early days, fomite transmission was considered likely to be a major factor, but as research into it has been carried out, there's been a shift in that thinking. Whilst fomite transmission hasn't been totally ruled out, any risk is considered very low in real life settings.

Exaggerated risk of transmission of COVID-19 by fomites - The Lancet


----------



## LDC (Jan 3, 2021)

Epona said:


> I wasn't aware that fomite transmission DIDN'T occur, because everything I have read in the news about washing your hands and sanitising between touching items in the supermarket indicates that it does.
> 
> Please provide a link that proves there is no fomite transmission, because that goes against everything I have heard so far.
> 
> I am really sorry if you misinterpreted or misunderstood my post, I do have significant communication issues and I am feeling really picked on right now.



You're explaining a mix of different things very badly, and some of what you're trying to explain is incorrect, some correct, and some just speculation, that's why some of us are struggling to make sense of it.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

So basically news services have been giving incorrect advice pretty much all last year - it isn't my bloody fault that they have been doing that then, is it?


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> You're explaining a mix of different things very badly, and some of what you're trying to explain is incorrect, some correct, and some just speculation, that's why some of us are struggling to make sense of it.



I'm not explaining anything, I'm mostly just musing and thinking aloud like most of us here, and some of my info was based on stuff that has been in the news over the last year, perhaps every single one of us who doesn't have a pHD in a relevant subject should just back off this thread


----------



## LDC (Jan 3, 2021)

Epona said:


> So basically news services have been giving incorrect advice pretty much all last year - it isn't my bloody fault that they have been doing that then, is it?



No, most of the info pushed has been social distancing and mask wearing rather than hand washing. Formite transmission happens but it is very low compared to other routes. It's also irrelevant to the vaccine and how it works.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

Also I made that post on 11th December and no-one noticed it until it was quoted earlier tonight - so it was deemed an OK or irrelevant post for nearly a month - THAT is why I am feeling picked on, because someone has dredged back through the thread and quoted something I said ages ago and kept banging on about it to make an argument.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

I mean seriously - the post of mine that has seemingly caused this argument was an offhand comment I made nearly a month ago and several pages back, it isn't something I said today or yesterday, it has been dredged up from several pages back on this thread and there have been a whole load of other discussions going on, nearly a month's worth, since.

I shouldn't need to explain why that being dredged up and being pinioned for it by what is now several posters , weeks later and from several pages back in the thread (posted before we even had a vaccine), makes me feel singled out or picked on.

I mean seriously if anyone had an issue with it you should have picked me up on it at the time, not weeks later to create an argument about something I barely fucking remember posting - of course I feel fucking picked on and you can all go to hell.


----------



## maomao (Jan 3, 2021)

Handwashing still has top billing in government advice - hands, face, space. It's not unreasonable that people worry about fomite transmission. 

My poor wife, who has some level of ocd that she refuses to see a doctor about, has washed her hands till they're raw and bleeding several times this year.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 3, 2021)

Epona said:


> Also I made that post on 11th December and no-one noticed it until it was quoted earlier tonight - so it was deemed an OK or irrelevant post for nearly a month - THAT is why I am feeling picked on, because someone has dredged back through the thread and quoted something I said ages ago and kept banging on about it to make an argument.



That was me. I just clicked on the thread, read through it and didn't realise that your post was three weeks ago. I didn't dredge back through the thread.

But I wasn't an arsehole - I just asked for a link, in a polite but not too polite way. And I didn't keep banging on about it, either, I just responded to you.

The subject you brought up is important. Knowing that fomite transmission is negligible makes a difference, and it could change in the future.


----------



## LDC (Jan 3, 2021)

Yeah, I didn't notice how long ago the post was made, just commented on what was current. Sorry you're feeling picked on though, although that does seem quite an extreme reaction to a few comments.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

Of course I feel picked on when I made a post a while back that no-one noticed and then someone a while later quotes it and it becomes a hot topic that multiple posters (who didn't notice or care when I made the original post) weigh in on and everyone jumps on it and has a go at me weeks later.  I am a human being and a fairly vulnerable one at that, and I think the fact this thread has suddenly turned its attention on an offhand comment I made weeks ago with people keep mentioning me (so it shows up in my notifications) and demanding that I provide this or that (when no-one gave a shit when I actually made the post) feels pretty horrible tbh.

It does feel fairly pack mentality - one person quoted it and criticised and then people started joining in - you all could have individually said something to disagree with my post when I made it weeks back.


----------



## purenarcotic (Jan 3, 2021)

Step away ffs, nobody is picking on you.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

purenarcotic said:


> Step away ffs, nobody is picking on you.



And another one joins the circling pack


----------



## Supine (Jan 3, 2021)

In other news...

Marr just said the 'new one dose strategy'. The BBC really need to sort their journalism out. That is basic misinformation.


----------



## purenarcotic (Jan 3, 2021)

Epona said:


> And another one joins the circling pack



Not really, but you have a pattern of accusing people of picking on you when they aren’t and it really grates on me. I agree with you that washing hands regularly is still important, the evidence suggests it’s not quite as important as it was once thought to be. There is all sorts of half truths and misinformation going around, so of course people are going to robustly ask for evidence and challenge things they disagree with. That is not the same as a personal attack. Walk away, take a breath, give your gorgeous cats a cuddle. Nobody is attacking you.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

purenarcotic said:


> Not really, but you have a pattern of accusing people of picking on you when they aren’t and it really grates on me. I agree with you that washing hands regularly is still important, the evidence suggests it’s not quite as important as it was once thought to be. There is all sorts of half truths and misinformation going around, so of course people are going to robustly ask for evidence and challenge things they disagree with. That is not the same as a personal attack. Walk away, take a breath, give your gorgeous cats a cuddle. Nobody is attacking you.



If people don't want me to feel like I am being picked on then they shouldn't quote old posts of mine and have a go at me where everyone else weighs in.  What the hell am I supposed to think when this happens?  The post has been there completely uncommented on and without criticism for nearly a month.  Then it is quoted by someone and other people start joining in. It isn't so much the fact that it got quoted, it is the fact that it has been there for a while so all the people that weighed in once it was quoted could have said something sooner rather than piling in on the back of someone else. Of course I feel picked on.


----------



## Supine (Jan 3, 2021)

Epona said:


> If people don't want me to feel like I am picking on them then they shouldn't quote old posts of mine and have a go at me where everyone else weighs in.  What the hell am I supposed to think when this happens?  The post has been there completely uncommented on and without criticism for nearly a month.  Then it is quoted by someone and other people start joining in. Of course I feel picked on.



Your supposed to think this is a discussion forum and people may discuss stuff you post. Even if it was last month. I can't see anyone picking on you.


----------



## LDC (Jan 3, 2021)

Epona said:


> If people don't want me to feel like I am being picked on then they shouldn't quote old posts of mine and have a go at me where everyone else weighs in.  What the hell am I supposed to think when this happens?  The post has been there completely uncommented on and without criticism for nearly a month.  Then it is quoted by someone and other people start joining in. Of course I feel picked on.



Maye step away now and stop making this thread about you.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 3, 2021)

Epona, you are not being picked on, scifisam was just catching-up on the thread & responded. I remember seeing your post at the time, and thinking actually I think there's been a shift in opinion over fomite transmission, but I was scrolling on the phone, so didn't reply at the time, as it's fiddley trying to find information & post the links.

This morning I am on the laptop, and as it had come up again, I responded, but as I was typing, scifisam posted a similar reply & link anyway.

You are, of course, right the media did make a big thing about fomite transmission at the start, although this has fizzled out somewhat more recently, but they & the government continue with the hand washing advice, simply because there still could be some small risk, and keeping hands clean can't do any harm, unless you take it to the extremes like maomao's poor wife.

It's been a fast moving year, when it comes to the scientists understanding this bloody virus, and none of us can be expected to keep up with every single bit of new research and information as it changes, and that includes both you & I, but by people pulling together new information and posting it on here, we can all learn and keep up with it more, than from the snippets the media tend to provide.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

Supine said:


> Your supposed to think this is a discussion forum and people may discuss stuff you post. Even if it was last month. I can't see anyone picking on you.



"You're"

HTH


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> Epona, you are not being picked on, scifisam was just catching-up on the thread & responded. I remember seeing your post at the time, and thinking actually I think there's been a shift in opinion over fomite transmission, but I was scrolling on the phone, so didn't reply at the time, as it's fiddley trying to find information & post the links.
> 
> This morning I am on the laptop, and as it had come up again, I responded, but as I am was typing, scifisam posted a similar reply & link anyway.
> 
> ...



Do you not think it might have been helpful to me at that time if you had given more up to date information rather than just thinking I am being a prat and doing something else on your phone?

I am not trying to make this thread about me, I am wondering why it ended up about me and the best thing that can happen now is for people to leave me the goddam fuck alone and stop telling me what a bad person I am, because that makes me feel the need to defend myself. (abuse survivor reaction)


----------



## purenarcotic (Jan 3, 2021)

Oh come the fuck on. Nobody thinks you are a bad person ffs. Two people asked you for some evidence on a thread about a science based subject. God forbid you should google something so you accuse people of picking on you instead. You weren’t being asked to defend yourself, you were being asked for evidence of your assertion about hand washing. That’s it. Nobody wants you dead, nobody wants you off the thread, nobody wants anything bad to happen to you. They just disagreed with you. People are entitled to do that. On a discussion board.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

Sorry I didn't see where only scientists are allowed to post.  Which type of scientists are allowed?

"Evidence of my assertion about hand washing" OMFG really?


----------



## Supine (Jan 3, 2021)

Boring


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jan 3, 2021)

Supine said:


> In other news...
> 
> Marr just said the 'new one dose strategy'. The BBC really need to sort their journalism out. That is basic misinformation.



Been hearing the second dose referred to as a 'booster' shot yesterday, R4.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 3, 2021)

Epona said:


> Do you not think it might have been helpful to me at that time if you had given more up to date information rather than just thinking I am being a prat and doing something else on your phone?



I didn't think you were a prat, why would you think that?

I rarely view urban on my phone, and it's even rarer for me to reply on the phone, as I have thick fingers and struggle with a tiny keypad. I remember scrolling the morning after you had posted, whilst waiting for a cab, it was just a quick look at urban to fill a few minutes, I didn't go on to do anything else on my phone. 

As I said in my last post, it's been a fast moving situation, and most people can't be expected to keep up with every new bit of information, especially if it's not wildly reported by the media, that doesn't make any of them prats.

The prats are the covid deniers & conspiracy loons, of which you are not one.


----------



## Aladdin (Jan 3, 2021)

scifisam said:


> Okaaaay... That doesn't align with anything I've read about fomite transmission for covid 19. There's no "magic" involved. Your personal opinion isn't a cite, sorry.





			https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2004973?query=featured_home
		





And...


Therefore, transmission may also occur indirectly through touching surfaces in the immediate environment or objects contaminated with virus from an infected person (e.g. stethoscope or thermometer), followed by touching the mouth, nose, or eyes. 

Despite consistent evidence as to SARS-CoV-2 contamination of surfaces and the survival of the virus on certain surfaces, there are no specific reports which have directly demonstrated fomite transmission. People who come into contact with potentially infectious surfaces often also have close contact with the infectious person, making the distinction between respiratory droplet and fomite transmission difficult to discern. However, fomite transmission is considered a likely mode of transmission for SARS-CoV-2, given consistent findings about environmental contamination in the vicinity of infected cases and the fact that other coronaviruses and respiratory viruses can transmit this way.










						Transmission of SARS-CoV-2: implications for infection prevention precautions
					

Scientific Brief




					www.who.int
				





They are cleaning surfaces and using uv robotics to "deep clean" surfaces in hospitals ...for this reason..
Also...covid19 survives very well in cold temperatures. It's not unreasonable to think that if someone with the virus coughs on packaging that the next person to pick it up within a certain time frame will come in contact with the virus. 

This is why classrooms and corridors here are being fogged every day.  Door handles and surfaces are being disinfected 3 to 6 times a day. It was known 3 months ago that the virus stays viable on stacked books for up to 8 days. Libraries were informed at the time.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 3, 2021)

I think the main reason there's still a lot of places emphasising their surface-cleaning routines is because it's a visible thing they can do to demonstrate they are doing "something". It's easier to clean surfaces than it is to entirely redesign a ventilation system.

I still use the hand sanitizer when I go into small shops. It's not because I think it does anything much to reduce transmission, it's only as a courtesy to anyone working in there who might feel anxious if I didn't. Performative hygiene, is that the term?

Unfortunately the emphasis on surfaces gives false reassurance, I think. A pub has hand sanitiser and wipes the tables and pretends to be "covid safe" but it's not.

I think there's been quite a big failure in the public health messaging to make people understand the ventilation thing.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

So at which point was hand sanitising decided useless and by whom?  Because that info hasn't filtered down to most of us yet.

I don't have an issue with ventilation since the only places I have been in the last year are In My Home, Outdoors, and brief forays to the supermarket or chemist.


----------



## prunus (Jan 3, 2021)

Epona said:


> So at which point was hand sanitising decided useless and by whom?  Because that info hasn't filtered down to most of us yet.
> 
> I don't have an issue with ventilation since the only places I have been in the last year are In My Home, Outdoors, and brief forays to the supermarket or chemist.



It’s not been decided as useless, it’s just that it’s become apparent that it’s (or was) not quite as important a method of transmission suppression as was first thought.

I caveat that with was because my feeling is that, from a precautionary standpoint if nothing else, we should be treating the new variant, which clearly has different (and not yet fully understood) transmission characteristics, as almost a ‘new’ pandemic, at least until we have some more info. For my part I have resurrected my protocols from pandemic 1 (given up in about May) - eg leaving deliveries untouched in the hall for 24 hours if possible, sticking takeaway containers in the oven at 80C for ten minutes, etc, for the time being.

To stress: this is almost certainly overkill, but it’s not a huge hardship, and I’d prefer to data to come out and say I’ve been doing it unnecessarily than, well, picking up the virus I guess!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 3, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2004973?query=featured_home
> 
> 
> View attachment 246809
> ...



TBF, that article is dated 16th April 2020, much more research has been done since, as per the links to The Lancet posted on the pervious page, hence the change in thinking on any possible risk from surface transmission, outside of hospitals the risk is considered to be low.


----------



## Aladdin (Jan 3, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> TBF, that article is dated 16th April 2019, much more research has been done since, as per the links to The Lancet posted on the pervious page, hence the change in thinking on any possible risk from surface transmission, outside of hospitals the risk is considered to be low.



Actually it is dated April 2020 ...
There is atill a risk. 
And with a new variant wafting about and cases on the increase its worth taking note that the virus still can be viable on surfaces. 
The original research is still valid.

Also the Lancet study was based on two sites in hospital. Both areas would be cleaned daily a number of times. One area...ICU would have deep cleaning carried out regularly. So the study doesn't actually look at viral viability on surfaces in the community at all.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

So if surface transmission is not a thing any more can we have some links to research into that please?  Because most of us have been fucking wiping all our groceries down (reminded me of some of my lowest points as someone with OCD) since March and we don't have that info.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 3, 2021)

By the way the surface transmission thing was never treated very logically in the early stages anyway, in my opinion. There was a lot of messaging about washing hands. And yet there was no direct advice about whether we should worry about things like stuff brought back from the supermarket. Takeaway food was allowed throughout the first lockdown - which didn't make any sense to me, if surface transmission was a real worry.


----------



## Aladdin (Jan 3, 2021)

teuchter said:


> By the way the surface transmission thing was never treated very logically in the early stages anyway, in my opinion. There was a lot of messaging about washing hands. And yet there was no direct advice about whether we should worry about things like stuff brought back from the supermarket. Takeaway food was allowed throughout the first lockdown - which didn't make any sense to me, if surface transmission was a real worry.




Dunno. Over here they got schools to buy fogging machines and ramped up cleaning. All door handles and surfaces were to be cleaned at regular intervals. Basically any surface that a hand would regularly touch. 

Now they're saying the new variant is  potentially a lot more transmissable and that it effects children more so than the original virus. 
Its a new game now. 

I'll stick with cleaning surfaces and ensuring that what I touch has been wiped with a dettol wipe. Including my shopping.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 3, 2021)

Epona said:


> So if surface transmission is not a thing any more can we have some links to research into that please?  Because most of us have been fucking wiping all our groceries down (reminded me of some of my lowest points as someone with OCD) since March and we don't have that info.


A link was posted on the previous page:



			https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30561-2/fulltext
		


It's not the case that it's necessarily "not a thing" anymore, it's just that it appears that transmission through the air is much more significant.

You're quite right that this just hasn't been communicated at all effectively through public health messaging. There really ought to be things like public info films with graphic depictions of aerosols spreading through the air, to help people visualise what is liable to be happening. Early on there was that study where they visualised runners breathing out clouds of infected air... and it seemed to get some attention in the media. There should be films depicting that sort of thing in pubs and shops. Maybe there are and I've missed them. It would probably help with emphasising the reason for wearing masks too.


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

I have no issue with wearing masks or anything like that, I've barely left the house since March last year in fact - I am just a bit stressed about all the time and steriwipes that I wasted swabbing down my fucking groceries (based on best information at the time) if that is now irrelvant.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 3, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> Dunno. Over here they got schools to buy fogging machines and ramped up cleaning. All door handles and surfaces were to be cleaned at regular intervals. Basically any surface that a hand would regularly touch.


What are "regular intervals"?

Seems like you'd need to do it in between every time someone touched it to really make much difference. I've never really understood the point of cleaning bus and train surfaces down each night. Maybe you stop the last few passengers of the previous day infecting the first few passengers the next morning - if the virus can even survive that long. The principle risk surely is two people touching the surface quite soon after one another and daily cleaning won't help that. Best for everyone just to try not to touch anything.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 3, 2021)

Epona said:


> I have no issue with wearing masks or anything like that, I've barely left the house since March last year in fact - I am just a bit stressed about all the time and steriwipes that I wasted swabbing down my fucking groceries (based on best information at the time) if that is now irrelvant.


This is not a criticism - I wiped down groceries for a short time too, and it might well be that it does reduce your risk - but I'm interested, did you do that as a result of what you saw as "official" advice or as a result of your own research?


----------



## existentialist (Jan 3, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> Dunno. Over here they got schools to buy fogging machines and ramped up cleaning. All door handles and surfaces were to be cleaned at regular intervals. Basically any surface that a hand would regularly touch.
> 
> Now they're saying the new variant is  potentially a lot more transmissable and that it effects children more so than the original virus.
> Its a new game now.
> ...


I suppose my (slightly cynical) approach goes something like..."I can't know for certain that this handle/surface/object has been adequately cleaned, therefore I will treat it as contaminated, and clean myself after contact".

I was responsible for putting together a risk assessment and policy to allow a counselling centre to operate (despite my strong reservations about it doing so), and it very quickly became obvious that, in terms of cleaning and disinfection, it was asking a lot to expect people to do this adequately. Indeed, I had quite a row about a statement in the draft I was given that said "Practitioners are responsible for ensuring that clients have cleaned and disinfected toilet areas after use" - that just wasn't going to be able to be policed or guaranteed.

So I've generally taken the line that everything I touch outside is potentially contaminated, and I need to deal with what I am in control of, which boils down to handwashing or sanitising. I am considering resurrecting the surgical gloves for stuff where I'm likely to come into contact with possibly-contaminated surfaces and the opportunities to wash/sanitise are not there.

It sounds more paranoid than it is!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 3, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> Actually it is dated April 2020 ...
> There is atill a risk.
> And with a new variant wafting about and cases on the increase its worth taking note that the virus still can be viable on surfaces.
> The original research is still valid.
> ...



Yes, of course, I meant 2020, I was thinking last year, and not awake enough to remember we're in 2020 now.   

The link I posted to The Lancet did discus spread in the community.



> A 2020 literature review8 included most of the studies I have cited here (and others), but adds no new research, and in my view, does not critically evaluate previously published studies. I am not disputing the findings of these studies, only the applicability to real life. For example, in the studies that used a sample of 107, 106, and 104 particles of infectious virus on a small surface area,1,  2,  3 these concentrations are a lot higher than those in droplets in real-life situations, with the amount of virus actually deposited on surfaces likely to be several orders of magnitude smaller.5 Hence, a real-life situation is better represented in the work of Dowell and colleagues7 in which no viable virus was found on fomites.





> In my opinion, the chance of transmission through inanimate surfaces is very small, and only in instances where an infected person coughs or sneezes on the surface, and someone else touches that surface soon after the cough or sneeze (within 1–2 h). I do not disagree with erring on the side of caution, but this can go to extremes not justified by the data. Although periodically disinfecting surfaces and use of gloves are reasonable precautions especially in hospitals, I believe that fomites that have not been in contact with an infected carrier for many hours do not pose a measurable risk of transmission in non-hospital settings. A more balanced perspective is needed to curb excesses that become counterproductive.





			https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30561-2/fulltext


----------



## Epona (Jan 3, 2021)

teuchter said:


> This is not a criticism - I wiped down groceries for a short time too, and it might well be that it does reduce your risk - but I'm interested, did you do that as a result of what you saw as "official" advice or as a result of your own research?



Because it was what everyone else on urban was doing at the time and we were talking about it here on Urban.  You can try to be revisionist about it and say it didn't happen if you like I suppose.  I wasn't the only one doing it though.


----------



## Boudicca (Jan 3, 2021)

teuchter said:


> There should be films depicting that sort of thing in pubs and shops. Maybe there are and I've missed them. It would probably help with emphasising the reason for wearing masks too.



The El Pais article which has appeared here a few times is a nice clear explanation:









						A room, a bar and a classroom: how the coronavirus is spread through the air
					

The risk of contagion is highest in indoor spaces but can be reduced by applying all available measures to combat infection via aerosols. Here is an overview of the likelihood of infection in three everyday scenarios, based on the safety measures used and the length of exposure




					english.elpais.com


----------



## Aladdin (Jan 3, 2021)

teuchter said:


> This is not a criticism - I wiped down groceries for a short time too, and it might well be that it does reduce your risk - but I'm interested, did you do that as a result of what you saw as "official" advice or as a result of your own research?




Over here the HSE lists surface transmission as potential infection risk. 
Even up to 3 days ago. 









						How COVID-19 is spread
					

COVID-19 (coronavirus) is spread in sneeze or cough droplets. Read more about how the virus can spread from person to person.




					www2.hse.ie
				




I'd be very surprised if the NHS was doing otherwise?


----------



## Boudicca (Jan 3, 2021)

I only wiped my groceries down once or twice at the beginning. I stopped because a) I read that although it was scientifical possible, it was highly unlikely that you would catch covid from touching things, b) I lived (past tense!) in a low Covid area, and c) I'm lazy.

Now my ritual is that I always sanitise my hands at the entrance to the supermarket, again once I am back in the car (and before I take my mask off and scratch my nose), and then I wash my hands after I have unpacked my groceries.  This is enough for me.


----------



## Aladdin (Jan 3, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yes, of course, I meant 2020, I was thinking last year, and not awake enough to remember we're in 2020 now.
> 
> The link I posted to The Lancet did discus spread in the community.
> 
> ...





We are now in 2021 cupid_stunt 😁😁


And again...the research was only carried out in a limited location. Plus the researcher does admit that the virus could transmit from an infected person via them coughing onto or toucing a surface and another person shortly afterwards touching that surface
 The research does not state there is absolutely no risk.  
And they still advise to err on the side of caution. They also state clearly that this is their opinion based on two studies carried out in hospital sites..not community based. 

And whilst they arrive at an opinion / not a conclusive one...that transmission risk is low, it is important to also read that the research was within the parameters of an already more sterile environment than a standard community environment. 

I'll still be wiping down my shopping for another while. 
🙂 It's not a big deal to do that and with a new more transmissable variant on the loose I think I will continue to follow thr WHO and local HSE advice.


----------



## Aladdin (Jan 3, 2021)

existentialist said:


> I suppose my (slightly cynical) approach goes something like..."I can't know for certain that this handle/surface/object has been adequately cleaned, therefore I will treat it as contaminated, and clean myself after contact".
> 
> I was responsible for putting together a risk assessment and policy to allow a counselling centre to operate (despite my strong reservations about it doing so), and it very quickly became obvious that, in terms of cleaning and disinfection, it was asking a lot to expect people to do this adequately. Indeed, I had quite a row about a statement in the draft I was given that said "Practitioners are responsible for ensuring that clients have cleaned and disinfected toilet areas after use" - that just wasn't going to be able to be policed or guaranteed.
> 
> ...




Not at all paranoid.  🙂


----------



## existentialist (Jan 3, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> Not at all paranoid.  🙂


I'm talking about the mindset, rather than the actions. I think a lot of people see the thing as a bit of a binary choice - either "be paranoid" or "keep calm and carry on". I reckon I can manage to do the "paranoid" things without actually being paranoid about it


----------



## Aladdin (Jan 3, 2021)

existentialist said:


> I'm talking about the mindset, rather than the actions. I think a lot of people see the thing as a bit of a binary choice - either "be paranoid" or "keep calm and carry on". I reckon I can manage to do the "paranoid" things without actually being paranoid about it



Yes...that's exactly it.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 3, 2021)

I've probably relaxed too much. I've got a large aluminium bin outside the front door which I used to put deliveries in and gave a couple of sprays of 80% alcohol. I think I'll start that again - it's about the only contact I have with people apart from when someone walks/runs/cycles/horserides past me at a safe distance.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 3, 2021)

existentialist said:


> I'm talking about the mindset, rather than the actions. I think a lot of people see the thing as a bit of a binary choice - either "be paranoid" or "keep calm and carry on". I reckon I can manage to do the "paranoid" things without actually being paranoid about it



Yep I tried to set things up so I don't have to worry about them. Easy for me though being retired and living on my own.


----------



## elbows (Jan 3, 2021)

I am never impressed when I hear that some people have inappropriately written off surface transmission as a vector in this pandemic.

SAGE certainly havent written it off. This is from a December 23rd document about the new variant:



> It is essential to reinforce the core principles of a hierarchy of control measures to reduce physical transmission through the environment by all routes – close-range, airborne, and via surfaces, given the risks that transmission of the new variant may be higher for all these routes (medium confidence).





			https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/948607/s0995-mitigations-to-reduce-transmission-of-the-new-variant.pdf


----------



## teuchter (Jan 3, 2021)

elbows said:


> I am never impressed when I hear that some people have inappropriately written off surface transmission as a vector in this pandemic.



I avoid stuff like touching handrails in public areas, and I generally wash my hands when I get home. But I don't wipe down shopping, or place items from outside in quarantine like I did for a bit at the beginning. It's hard to know what level of worry about surface transmission is "appropriate".


----------



## elbows (Jan 3, 2021)

teuchter said:


> I avoid stuff like touching handrails in public areas, and I generally wash my hands when I get home. But I don't wipe down shopping, or place items from outside in quarantine like I did for a bit at the beginning. It's hard to know what level of worry about surface transmission is "appropriate".



Yeah. I never nuked my shopping at any stage, I just use the hand washing and not touching face stuff for that aspect too, eg if I am preparing food I insert some additional hand washing into the routine after touching packaging etc.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 3, 2021)

A brief derail from vaccines...

Fomites are an accepted mode of transmission; infectious viral samples have been recovered from surfaces (DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-69286-3 DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.05.009).

Infection severity: aerosol > droplet > fomite (DOI: 10.1101/2020.12.28.424565) which appears, not entirely unsurprisingly, to be related to depth of deposition in the respiratory tract.

A detailed review of transmission dynamics DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.0c08484.

Practically: I wash my hands whenever I return home from outside. Storing non-perishable shopping for a few days is going to greatly reduce risk of fomite transmission from such. I have always washed all perishable uncooked food items (vegetables, fruit, herbs) anyway.

Hand washing is still important as it also reduces the risks associated with other infections (influenza, colds, etc) and thus the complications thereof including the risk of requiring medical help for those infections, for myself or those I might infect, which in turn will inevitably raise the risk of subsequent exposure to SARS-CoV-2 or other nosocomial infection.


----------



## StoneRoad (Jan 3, 2021)

I'm going to carry on with the hand washing / sanitising and wiping down or spraying items when they arrive here, and mask wearing where appropriate outside the house.

It does look like formite transmission is a somewhat smaller vector than the aerosols, but I still don't think the risk is small enough to ignore (Locally, we've quite a spike in cases, probably the new variant(s) are largely responsible).


----------



## Aladdin (Jan 3, 2021)

I do wipe down my shopping and I quarantine certain things for 4 days. 
But...then again I am balancing my own known extremely high risk scenario with all of this.


----------



## platinumsage (Jan 3, 2021)

I wipe our grocery deliveries. It's for peace of mind, so I can e.g. get something out of my own freezer to read the cooking instructions or whatever, without worrying whether the delivery driver sneezed on it and consequently washing my hands after put it back in the freezer, and then cleaning the freezer door handle etc. It's good for my own mental health to make the house a certified COVID-free zone to my own satisfaction.


----------



## elbows (Jan 3, 2021)

Sounds like my local hospital is on a list of the first to get the Oxford vaccine.









						George Eliot hospital one of the first to deliver Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine
					

The roll-out starts tomorrow




					www.coventrytelegraph.net
				






> Tomorrow (January 4) the Eliot will begin what has been described by NHS England as delivering the Oxford AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine for 'surveillance purposes' ahead of the fulll roll-out to hundreds of GP-led services later in the week.
> 
> The Eliot is one of just six chosen to start the huge roll-out of the vaccine alongside the Royal Free Hospital London NHS Foundation Trust, Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, the Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust.
> 
> NHS England say it is 'standard practice' for the vaccination to be rolled-out for surveillance purposes before the bulk of supplies are sent out more widely.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 3, 2021)

On the importance of continued mitigations and a proactive policy of 'zero COVID' to support a successful vaccination programme...

Vaccine escape: "the longer SARS-CoV-2 is in circulation, and the greater the number of people infected, the more of a chance escape mutants will have to form, and imperil the unprecedented efforts put into vaccine development".


In particular, with just 3 mutations, SARS-CoV-2 has demonstrated, in vitro, escape from neutralisation by multiple antibodies (DOI: 10.1101/2020.12.28.424451).


----------



## existentialist (Jan 3, 2021)

2hats said:


> On the importance of continued mitigations and a proactive policy of 'zero COVID' to support a successful vaccination programme...
> 
> Vaccine escape: "the longer SARS-CoV-2 is in circulation, and the greater the number of people infected, the more of a chance escape mutants will have to form, and imperil the unprecedented efforts put into vaccine development".
> 
> ...



Fuck.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 3, 2021)

teuchter said:


> I avoid stuff like touching handrails in public areas, and I generally wash my hands when I get home. But I don't wipe down shopping, or place items from outside in quarantine like I did for a bit at the beginning. It's hard to know what level of worry about surface transmission is "appropriate".



Yeah, I'm pretty much the same. The research says the risk is negligible, like I said, but being a bit more careful won't do any harm. There's no need to panic about cleaning stuff to radiation standards - that's not a binary issue, either.

I don't really understand the anger at the news that this mode of transmission is much less dangerous than was thought - surely that's a good thing? 😔


----------



## nyxx (Jan 4, 2021)

When I think back to what my covid risk mitigation methods were back in March-April, there’s a few things that I’ve dialled back a bit as new data has emerged. I’m still washing my hands a lot more than pre covid, but I don’t carry a hook shaped thing around to open things, and I don’t quarantine shopping for 3 days before using it.

Interest in hand cream skyrocketed amongst some of my friends back in April - cracked sore hands from extra washing with soaps and coating with sanitizer was a common problem & there was lots of swapping ideas for treatments.

The one thing the government was really pushing at that point was washing hands.  I remember being perturbed at the toilets on a train I had to get, being out of soap and only a tiny dribble of water, when all that was being pumped out was “wash your hands” and it was becoming increasingly clear that a lock down was overdue.

Edited to add: I understand that the info as to fomite transmission was something along the lines of it’s nothing like as much of a factor as previously thought - but since it’s still a possibility, and because it helps stop spread other diseases, the messaging on it is staying the same. (Might be wrong on this, it’s an agglomeration of stuff from too many different places over the past months.)


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2021)

Epona said:


> I have no issue with wearing masks or anything like that, I've barely left the house since March last year in fact - I am just a bit stressed about all the time and steriwipes that I wasted swabbing down my fucking groceries (based on best information at the time) if that is now irrelvant.


I've been _vaguely _aware that the risks of transmission from groceries and deliveries has been downgraded over the months, maybe from reading an article, but more likely from on here.  But then it's an anxiety thing even if part of your brain accepts the science. I still find myself waiting 24 hours before opening the post on my more twitchy days (and also because I'm a disorganised mess   )


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2021)

Boudicca said:


> I only wiped my groceries down once or twice at the beginning. I stopped because a) I read that although it was scientifical possible, it was highly unlikely that you would catch covid from touching things, b) I lived (past tense!) in a low Covid area, and c) I'm lazy.
> 
> Now my ritual is that I always sanitise my hands at the entrance to the supermarket, again once I am back in the car (and before I take my mask off and scratch my nose), and then I wash my hands after I have unpacked my groceries.  This is enough for me.


ONe of the problems of using sanitisers at the entrance to buildings, which I do use, is that occasionally you squeeze away at them only to find they are empty. Fuck me, you've then been sharing the last person's surface rubbing without benefit of absolution!


----------



## platinumsage (Jan 4, 2021)

Can't say I'm super thrilled seeing the lack of social distancing going on during vaccinations.

Surely it can't be too hard to explain the second appointment from two metres away:


----------



## Sunray (Jan 4, 2021)

What’s important now is how the country scales from one to millions.
I’d like to hope it’s going to be quick. There are 4 million doses of the Oxford vaccine available. Produced in the UK, lots more being made as we speak. 

Can the nation do what’s needed?


----------



## platinumsage (Jan 4, 2021)

Sunray said:


> What’s important now is how the country scales from one to millions.
> I’d like to hope it’s going to be quick. There are 4 million doses of the Oxford vaccine available. Produced in the UK, lots more being made as we speak.
> 
> Can the nation do what’s needed?



According to Whitty and Hancock, the rate of vaccination is only limited by the supply of it - if the manufacturers supply more the rate of administration will increase accordingly.


----------



## Supine (Jan 4, 2021)




----------



## magneze (Jan 4, 2021)

Why did he refuse the MoD help? Are we about to be invaded or something? All hands I'd have thought.

Incredibly serious pandemic, killing thousands, health service overwhelmed.

Would you like some extra help administering the vaccines?

How is the answer to that question 'no thank you'?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 4, 2021)

I guess it's going to be pretty interesting to keep an eye on Israel's Covid stats over the next couple of months.


----------



## magneze (Jan 4, 2021)

.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 4, 2021)

teuchter said:


> View attachment 247017
> 
> I guess it's going to be pretty interesting to keep an eye on Israel's Covid stats over the next couple of months.



Even funnier watching the Labour party explode over them.


----------



## Sunray (Jan 4, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> According to Whitty and Hancock, the rate of vaccination is only limited by the supply of it - if the manufacturers supply more the rate of administration will increase accordingly.



Can't be bothered  to listen to them any more.  Do they say anything that anyone believes?


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2021)

magneze said:


> Why did he refuse the MoD help? Are we about to be invaded or something? All hands I'd have thought.
> 
> Incredibly serious pandemic, killing thousands, health service overwhelmed.
> 
> ...


I expect he was worried about the "optics" (horrible expression)


----------



## magneze (Jan 4, 2021)

existentialist said:


> I expect he was worried about the "optics" (horrible expression)


He wanted to make them worse?


----------



## platinumsage (Jan 4, 2021)

magneze said:


> He wanted to make them worse?



I guess it was because we either didn't have enough vaccine for the troops to administer, or we didn't have enough available troops to administer it what with xmas leave and the Dover testing etc.


----------



## elbows (Jan 4, 2021)

2hats said:


>




Similar concerns here:


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2021)

I can just see it in 5 years' time - most of the world will be Covid-free, with just a few plague-ridden outposts remaining, thanks to governments not acting soon enough, dicking around with vaccine delivery, and creating superstrains of the damn thing that means the rest of the world will regard us as something equivalent to a leper colony...


----------



## Combustible (Jan 4, 2021)

elbows said:


> Similar concerns here:




The question of whether giving single or more spaced out vaccine doses leading to partial immunity increases the selection pressure for the virus to evolve the avoid the vaccine is far from clear. As has also been pointed out, leaving more of the population for longer without even a single dose while the virus is uncontrollably spreading also leads to even more people fighting the virus with a partial immune response. This is very different to the concerns about untested convalescent plasma/monoclonal antibody treatments and the like.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2021)

Combustible said:


> The question of whether giving single or more spaced out vaccine doses leading to partial immunity increases the selection pressure for the virus to evolve the avoid the vaccine is far from clear. As has also been pointed out, leaving more of the population for longer without even a single dose while the virus is uncontrollably spreading also leads to even more people fighting the virus with a partial immune response. This is very different to the concerns about untested convalescent plasma/monoclonal antibody treatments and the like.



Only, if we do end up creating a situation where the virus is able to evolve past the current vaccine, we're going to be right back to square one.


----------



## prunus (Jan 4, 2021)

existentialist said:


> Only, if we do end up creating a situation where the virus is able to evolve past the current vaccine, we're going to be right back to square one.



Not quite square one, both the IC and mRNA vaccine methodologies are capable of very fast turnaround of new sequences (ie to target the mutant domains) - in theory these could be added into the mix in a matter of weeks, and might not require re-approval for rollout. It would mean that we could be in for a rolling vaccination program for a year or more, and considerable resources would have to be brought to bear, but it’s not square one. Bottom of a snake on square 11 maybe.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2021)

prunus said:


> Not quite square one, both the IC and mRNA vaccine methodologies are capable of very fast turnaround of new sequences (ie to target the mutant domains) - in theory these could be added into the mix in a matter of weeks, and might not require re-approval for rollout. It would mean that we could be in for a rolling vaccination program for a year or more, and considerable resources would have to be brought to bear, but it’s not square one. Bottom of a snake on square 11 maybe.


That did occur to me, but I felt that the acknowledging of it would dilute the vitriol of my polemic.


----------



## Indeliblelink (Jan 5, 2021)

University of Miami Miller School of Medicine Leads Groundbreaking Trial for COVID -19 Treatment
					

University of Miami Miller School of Medicine researchers led a unique and groundbreaking randomized controlled trial showing umbilical cord derived mesenchymal




					www.newswise.com
				




University of Miami Miller School of Medicine researchers led a unique and groundbreaking randomized controlled trial showing umbilical cord derived mesenchymal stem cell infusions safely reduce risk of death and quicken time to recovery for the severest COVID-19 patients, according to results published in _STEM CELLS Translational Medicine_ in January 2021.
The study’s senior author, Camillo Ricordi, M.D., director of the Diabetes Research Institute (DRI) and Cell Transplant Center at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, said treating COVID-19 with mesenchymal stem cells makes sense.

*Results: treatment group vs. control group*
The paper describes findings from 24 patients hospitalized at University of Miami Tower or Jackson Memorial Hospital with COVID-19 who developed severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. Each received two infusions given days apart of either mesenchymal stem cells or placebo.
“It was a double-blind study. Doctors and patients didn’t know what was infused,” Dr. Ricordi said. “Two infusions of 100 million stem cells were delivered within three days, for a total of 200 million cells in each subject in the treatment group.”  
Researchers found the treatment was safe, with no infusion-related serious adverse events.  
*Patient survival at one month was 91% in the stem cell treated group versus 42% in the control group. Among patients younger than 85 years old, 100% of those treated with mesenchymal stem cells survived at one month.*
Dr. Ricordi and colleagues also found time to recovery was faster among those in the treatment arm. More than half of patients treated with mesenchymal stem cell infusions recovered and went home from the hospital within two weeks after the last treatment. More than 80% of the treatment group recovered by day 30, versus less than 37% in the control group.
“The umbilical cord contains progenitor stem cells, or mesenchymal stem cells, that can be expanded and provide therapeutic doses for over 10,000 patients from a single umbilical cord. It’s a unique resource of cells that are under investigation for their possible use in cell therapy applications, anytime you have to modulate immune response or inflammatory response,” he said. “We’ve been studying them with our collaborators in China for more than 10 years in Type 1 Diabetes, and there are currently over 260 clinical studies listed in _clinicaltrials.gov_ for treatment of other autoimmune diseases.”


Spoiler: rest of text



*Mesenchymal stem cells potential to restore normal immune response*
Mesenchymal cells not only help correct immune and inflammatory responses that go awry, they also have antimicrobial activity and have been shown to promote tissue regeneration.
"Our results confirm the powerful anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory effect of UC-MSC. These cells have clearly inhibited the 'cytokine storm', a hallmark of severe COVID-19,” said Giacomo Lanzoni, Ph.D, lead author of the paper and assistant research professor at the Diabetes Research Institute. “The results are critically important not only for COVID-19 but also for other diseases characterized by aberrant and hyperinflammatory immune responses, such as autoimmune Type 1 Diabetes.”
When given intravenously, mesenchymal stem cells migrate naturally to the lungs. That’s where therapy is needed in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome, a dangerous complication associated with severe inflammation and fluid buildup in the lungs.
“It seemed to me that these stem cells could be an ideal treatment option for severe COVID-19,” said Dr. Ricordi, Stacy Joy Goodman Professor of Surgery, Distinguished Professor of Medicine, and professor of biomedical engineering, microbiology and immunology. “It requires only an intravenous (IV) infusion, like a blood transfusion. It’s like smart bomb technology in the lung to restore normal immune response and reverse life-threatening complications.”

*Early success with mesenchymal stem cells*
When the pandemic emerged, Dr. Ricordi asked collaborators in China if they had studied mesenchymal stem cell treatment in COVID-19 patients. In fact, they and Israeli researchers reported great success treating COVID-19 patients with the stem cells, in many cases with 100% of treated patients surviving and recovering faster than those without stem cell treatment.  
But there was widespread skepticism about these initial results, because none of the studies had been randomized, where patients randomly received treatment or a control solution (placebo), to compare results in similar groups of patients.
“We approached the FDA and they approved our proposed randomized controlled trial in one week,and we started as quickly as possible,” Dr. Ricordi said.
Dr. Ricordi worked with several key collaborators at the Miller School, the University of Miami Health System, Jackson Health System, and collaborated with others in the U.S. and internationally, including Arnold I. Caplan, Ph.D., of Case Western Reserve University, who first described mesenchymal stem cells.

*Next steps*
The next step is to study use of the stem cells in COVID-19 patients who have not yet become severely ill but are at risk of having to be intubated, to determine if the infusions prevent disease progression.
The findings have implications for studies in other diseases, too, according to Dr. Ricordi.
Hyper-immune and hyper-inflammatory responses in autoimmune diseases might share a common thread with why some COVID-19 patients transition to severe forms of the disease and others don’t.

“Autoimmunity is a big challenge for healthcare, as is COVID-19. Autoimmunity affects 20% of the American population and includes over 100 disease conditions, of which Type 1 Diabetes can be considered just the tip of the iceberg. What we are learning is that there may be a common thread and risk factors that can predispose to both an autoimmune disease or to a severe reaction following viral infections, such as SARS-CoV-2,” he said.
The DRI Cell Transplant Center is planning to create a large repository of mesenchymal stem cells that are ready to use and can be distributed to hospitals and centers in North America, he said.  
“These could be used not only for COVID-19 but also for clinical trials to treat autoimmune diseases, like Type 1 Diabetes,” Dr. Ricordi said. “If we could infuse these cells at the onset of Type 1 Diabetes, we might be able to block progression of autoimmunity in newly diagnosed subjects, and progression of complications in patients affected by the disease long-term. We are planning such a trial specifically for diabetes nephropathy, a kidney disease that is one of the major causes of dialysis and kidney transplantation. We are also planning to do a study on umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cell transplantation in combination with pancreatic islets to see if you can modulate the immune response to an islet transplant locally.”
Funding by The Cure Alliance made launching the initial trial possible, while a $3 million grant from North America’s Building Trades Unions (NABTU) allowed Dr. Ricordi and colleagues to complete the clinical trial and expand research with mesenchymal stem cells.
“North America’s Building Trades Unions (NABTU) has been a major supporter of the Diabetes Research Institute since 1984, when they started a campaign to fund, and build, our state-of-the-art research and treatment facility. NABTU has continued to support our work through the years, including our mesenchymal stem cell research that helped lead the way to this clinical trial,” he said.

All the organizations funding the research are nonprofit entities, including the Barilla Group and Family, The Fondazione Silvio Tronchetti Provera, the Simkins Family Foundation and the Diabetes Research Institute Foundation. The National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences also provided funding.


----------



## CNT36 (Jan 5, 2021)

existentialist said:


> Only, if we do end up creating a situation where the virus is able to evolve past the current vaccine, we're going to be right back to square one.


Perhaps but all the current crop are focused exclusively on the spike protein. More traditional forms of inactivated or attenuated vaccine will likely be more effective against these and future mutations by provoking a response to multiple proteins. It may be quicker to just cut out the old spike and insert the new one in some RNA mind.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 5, 2021)

CNT36 said:


> Perhaps but all the current crop are focused exclusively on the spike protein. More traditional forms of inactivated or attenuated vaccine will likely be more effective against these and future mutations by provoking a response to multiple proteins. It may be quicker to just cut out the old spike and insert the new one in some RNA mind.


There are three vaccine candidates each of inactivated (Covaxin, BBIBP-CorV, CoronaVac) and at least one live attenuated (COVI-VAC), naturally targeting all proteins.


----------



## CNT36 (Jan 5, 2021)

2hats said:


> There are three vaccine candidates each of inactivated (Covaxin, BBIBP-CorV, CoronaVac) and at least one live attenuated (COVI-VAC), naturally targeting all proteins.


Yeah, I was aware of that hence not starting at square one.


----------



## felixthecat (Jan 6, 2021)

Right. I hope i get some sensible answers here. Had a discussion with my 18year old neice yesterday. She is the main carer for her mum who is a vulnerable person (also goes to college or rather doesn't go atm..)  Although she is young, fit and well because of her caring responsibilities she will be offered the vaccine sooner rather than later.

Her concern,  which I couldn't definitively allay was the possibility of effects on future fertility. She wants to have the vaccine because of the risk to her mum specifically, but she's a young woman and wants kids at some point and I understand her concerns.

I m doing vaccination training this afternoon and tomorrow which may answer my question but wondered if any of our resident science nerds may be able to answer sooner?


----------



## Supine (Jan 6, 2021)

The immune response from vaccines or natural invaders happens hundreds or thousands of times. If it affected fertility we wouldn't exist as a species. That's my non doctor response anyway.


----------



## LDC (Jan 6, 2021)

felixthecat said:


> Right. I hope i get some sensible answers here. Had a discussion with my 18year old neice yesterday. She is the main carer for her mum who is a vulnerable person (also goes to college or rather doesn't go atm..)  Although she is young, fit and well because of her caring responsibilities she will be offered the vaccine sooner rather than later.
> 
> Her concern,  which I couldn't definitively allay was the possibility of effects on future fertility. She wants to have the vaccine because of the risk to her mum specifically, but she's a young woman and wants kids at some point and I understand her concerns.
> 
> I m doing vaccination training this afternoon and tomorrow which may answer my question but wondered if any of our resident science nerds may be able to answer sooner?



I don't think that the vaccine training will address that concern.

TBH I think the totally honest answer is 'nobody knows' but the pragmatic one is that it's very likely there won't be a problem at all with that. Point out she's already had loads of vaccinations as well, as have millions of people all around the world, and no such issue with any other has come to light.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 6, 2021)

Ask her I she's worried about the effects of having a bad case of Covid on future fertility.


----------



## felixthecat (Jan 6, 2021)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> I don't think that the vaccine training will address that concern.
> 
> TBH I think the totally honest answer is 'nobody knows' but the pragmatic one is that there won't be a problem at all with that. Point out she's already had loads of vaccinations as well, as have millions of people all around the world, and no such issue with any other has come to light.


Shes a sensible kid and she'll have the vaccine because of the risk to  her mum but this is pretty much what I said.  That there's no indication that this would be the case and given the way the vaccines work its unlikely but there's no proof as yet
Cheers LynnDoyleCooper


----------



## prunus (Jan 6, 2021)

felixthecat said:


> Right. I hope i get some sensible answers here. Had a discussion with my 18year old neice yesterday. She is the main carer for her mum who is a vulnerable person (also goes to college or rather doesn't go atm..)  Although she is young, fit and well because of her caring responsibilities she will be offered the vaccine sooner rather than later.
> 
> Her concern,  which I couldn't definitively allay was the possibility of effects on future fertility. She wants to have the vaccine because of the risk to her mum specifically, but she's a young woman and wants kids at some point and I understand her concerns.
> 
> I m doing vaccination training this afternoon and tomorrow which may answer my question but wondered if any of our resident science nerds may be able to answer sooner?



I don’t know if I count as a science nerd, but some thoughts on this:

The IC vaccine (which she is most likely to get I would have thought) is an adenovirus vectored subunit system vaccine [this means that an adenovirus is used to introduce code for some of the subunits of the coronavirus into our cells, which then express those units and the immune system gets trained against them].  This vaccination methodology has been developed and used for something like 15+ years, for a number of different therapies (HIV, malaria, some anti-tumour agents) and so is pretty well tested and there is no sign of any effect on fertility or germ-line cells (these are the cells in ones ovaries or testicles that produce the eggs or sperm - they are the 'pure' copies of your DNA as it were, and as such are strongly protected from interference) - and nor would there be expected to be (ie from what we understand of its mode of action and human biology).

The mRNA vaccines (which is what the other 2 in use at the moment are) are newer technology, and I think this may the first time they've been used in anger as it were, but the methodology has been in development for several years and undergone extensive animal model testing, which won't have revealed any effects on fertility (or they wouldn't be using it) - and again, the mode of action wouldn't be expected to do so [it's similar to the adenovirus vectored method, except that the code is introduced directly rather than using another virus to carry it in].  Given it's newer I would say that the uncertainty regarding the risks for these types of vaccine is higher than the vectored vaccine, but the actual risk is probably about the same - ie negligible.

Nothing is certain of course, and there could be unknown effects particular to these specific vaccines, so the risk is not actually zero - but I would say it is low enough to be considered zero in practice (as clearly do the medical regulatory authorities, or they wouldn't license them).

FWIW I have two teenage children (one boy one girl) and I would have no hesitation in getting them vaccinated with either vaccine on this basis (or any other) - I wouldn't even give the fertility question a second thought.


----------



## felixthecat (Jan 6, 2021)

Thats very helpful prunus. I've just started the online vaccination training and that has also given me  information in a form I can understand (  )and can translate into teenspeak.
Good. I feel much better equipped  to put forward an informed point of view. I need to understand the science  to be able to do that and my eyes glaze over sometimes at all the acronyms and stats!


----------



## CNT36 (Jan 6, 2021)

A very general rule of thumb is that RNA vaccines and those using viral vectors are at the safer end of the vaccine spectrum. To again generalise they bring speed and safety to the table but are less efficacious than other types of vaccine.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 7, 2021)

Patients ‘rejecting Pfizer jab to wait for ‘English’ vaccine’
					

‘A lesson that Nationalism has consequences’




					www.standard.co.uk


----------



## Supine (Jan 7, 2021)

Just saw a report on bbc news that two rheumatoid arthritis drugs have been shown in trials to save lives and improve recovery by dampening the immune response. They will be rolled out immediately for use in icu's. More good news from science


----------



## elbows (Jan 8, 2021)

This nurse didnt get the result she and everyone else was hoping for:









						'Care needed' after getting Covid vaccine
					

Vaccination has been shown to prevent severe infection, even in people who catch the virus.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				






> 'Bethan' - not her real name - said: "I feel a huge amount of guilt - the fact that I made my family unwell. It's heartbreaking. I feel deflated, angry and upset at how frontline workers are being treated."
> Working on the NHS frontline, she was initially relieved to be offered the chance of a vaccine and despite difficulties getting an appointment, she received her first dose of the Pfizer-BioNtech vaccine last month.
> "It gave me peace of mind. It made me feel safer and that I was doing the right thing for my family... but it gives a false sense of security," she said.
> The nurse, from west Wales, said she was told it would take 10 days for the vaccine to offer some protection and reduce the risk of transmission.
> However three weeks after the jab, she began to feel unwell and was "shocked" when she tested positive for coronavirus.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 8, 2021)

It's going to be a problem, right? People getting the vaccine and then changing their behaviour under mistaken beliefs about what it means in terms of reduction of risk.


----------



## LDC (Jan 8, 2021)

elbows said:


> This nurse didnt get the result she and everyone else was hoping for:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If she did actually say she's 'angry and heartbroken' then sorry, but she's a fucking idiot, doubly so if she started behaving differently after having the vaccine. It doesn't provide 100% protection and she should know that.


----------



## Brainaddict (Jan 8, 2021)

Sigh. We are literally going to have to spend all year explaining to people who don't like thinking about numbers that 5% of a big number can still be quite a big number aren't we? And that the 95% figure is for people not getting it seriously. This is going to get very tedious.

Incidentally that reporting by the BBC is fucking irresponsible. They need to explain that plenty of vaccinated people will get the virus, it's not something to be 'angry' about, and they need to explain that until we have BOTH high vaccine uptake AND low prevalence in the population, people should not be changing their behaviour.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 8, 2021)

Brainaddict said:


> And that the 95% figure is for people not getting it seriously.


No. ~95% (Pfizer) is for people not developing any symptoms (AstraZeneca may be as low as ~70%, or lower, though clearly depends on the degree the government is determined to undermine their own vaccination programme).
~5% (~30%) will be for people experiencing symptoms but not developing disease so serious that they require hospitalisation.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 8, 2021)

Is there an equivalent graph to this one (which is for the Pfizer vaccine) for the Astrozeneca one?


----------



## Brainaddict (Jan 8, 2021)

2hats said:


> No. ~95% (Pfizer) is for people not developing any symptoms (AstraZeneca may be as low as ~70%, or lower, though clearly depends on the degree the government is determined to undermine their own vaccination programme).
> ~5% (~30%) will be for people experiencing symptoms but not developing disease so serious that they require hospitalisation.


Ah sorry, you're right, was getting confused. Memory failure rather than maths failure...


----------



## 2hats (Jan 8, 2021)

teuchter said:


> Is there an equivalent graph to this one (which is for the Pfizer vaccine) for the Astrozeneca one?


From the preprint linked in post #742.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Jan 8, 2021)

Someone I know has had the first Pfizer dose. She said she felt a bit rough for one night and had to get up in the night for a shower as she was sweating a lot. 

Really glad she has had it and has some protection at least.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 8, 2021)

2hats said:


> From the preprint linked in post #742.
> 
> View attachment 247721



Thanks.


MenACWY seems to refer to some other vaccine... were they giving the control group a different vaccine rather than placebo?
Do I understand correctly that the left hand graph somehow shows the combined results of some people getting full-dose/full-dose, and others half-dose/full-dose?
Has any further info emerged since then about whether the half-dose/full-dose regime does work better?
Why do they have an "exclsuion period" when the Pfizer one doesn't?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 8, 2021)

Moderna vaccine has been approved for use in the UK.

We've ordered 17 million doses, but IIRC delivery isn't expected until Mar./Apr. time.


----------



## belboid (Jan 8, 2021)

teuchter said:


> Thanks.
> 
> 
> MenACWY seems to refer to some other vaccine... were they giving the control group a different vaccine rather than placebo?


It’s a meningitis vaccine, it has similar immediate side effects that don’t occur with a purely saline injection and so doesn’t risk giving the game away immediately.


----------



## elbows (Jan 8, 2021)

Brainaddict said:


> Sigh. We are literally going to have to spend all year explaining to people who don't like thinking about numbers that 5% of a big number can still be quite a big number aren't we? And that the 95% figure is for people not getting it seriously. This is going to get very tedious.
> 
> Incidentally that reporting by the BBC is fucking irresponsible. They need to explain that plenty of vaccinated people will get the virus, it's not something to be 'angry' about, and they need to explain that until we have BOTH high vaccine uptake AND low prevalence in the population, people should not be changing their behaviour.



The story came out late at night and I thought it might end up being reframed and with a different headline later. That has indeed happened. The new headline is 'Care needed' after getting Covid vaccine.

Publicising these sorts of stories is one way to get the message through to people.

The changes the BBC made to the article today are a mixed bag. I saved the original and here are some quotes from the first version that I dont think are present in the current version:



> Bethan believes frontline NHS workers should be prioritised for the second dose.
> "It's controversial to say it, but they're prioritising the wrong group of people," she said.
> "I feel strongly that frontline workers need to be prioritised because it's highly contagious and we don't know what we're bringing home to our families.
> "I'm really nervous about going back to the ward. We don't know where we stand with the second vaccine and how much protection it provides."
> ...



Another opportunity to play spot the difference comes from this bit:

Current version:



> The British Medical Association Cymru Wales has previously expressed concern about the length of time between doses.
> Doctors' union, BMA Cymru Wales, said there was a lack of evidence to support waiting 12 weeks for a second vaccine dose.
> Chair Dr David Bailey said: "Our families don't choose to be exposed to a much higher dose of Covid, so we feel it's right that we should be protecting health workers and their families."



Original version:



> Doctors' union, BMA Cymru Wales, said there was a lack of evidence to support waiting 12 weeks for a second vaccine dose.
> Chair Dr David Bailey, said the plan was "putting people at risk".
> "We're also very concerned the Pfizer vaccine has poor data for the first vaccine preventing transmission," he said.
> "Our families don't choose to be exposed to a much higher dose of Covid, so we feel it's right that we should be protecting health workers and their families."


----------



## elbows (Jan 8, 2021)

As for my opinion of what she said, based on those quotes that are no longer present in the BBC article, I think it is a quite understandable position, albeit one that is far too narrow, insensitive and partially infuriating. Staff morale matters, so I want to hear all about it, even when the factors involved are far too narrow to be used to inform decision making on their own. Despite all the furore over PPE in the first wave, the subject of health workers being left inexcusably exposed was not focussed on as much as it could have been in the first wave or this subsequent wave. Vaccine approval and availability timetable meant vaccinations could not be used to remove most of the risk to such workers when the second wave arrived, but if I were a health worker I would be very upset that levels of infection in the nation as a whole were allowed to reach high levels that put so many at risk again. Its just I wouldnt be so narrow about it, and find it distasteful to talk about vaccination priorities in such a singleminded manner.


----------



## felixthecat (Jan 8, 2021)

Well that moved quickly. Im redeployed to the vaccination programme from Monday


----------



## platinumsage (Jan 8, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> Unlike the other vaccines they bought, they acquired the Moderna one very late, after the trial results, and we consequently won’t get any until April. The US is already giving it to people.
> 
> Now is when we need it, when the rollout rate is limited by the available vaccine and not by the staff to administer it etc. By April we‘ll have lots of vaccines to go around so it’ll be of limited utility, plus thousands more people will be dead by then.



I wish to retract this post after discovering the US had exclusive purchase rights for the first 20 million doses due to the money they invested in it, and that further doses wouldn’t be available to other countries until March/April in any event.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 13, 2021)

Not entirely unsurprisingly, an intranasal version of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) has been found to reduce viral shedding in animal models (hamsters and rhesus macaques) unlike the intramuscular version (AZD1222) suggesting it would be an advantageous method for reducing transmission as well as disease.








						Intranasal ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/AZD1222 vaccination reduces shedding of SARS-CoV-2 D614G in rhesus macaques
					

Intramuscular vaccination with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/AZD1222 protected rhesus macaques against pneumonia but did not reduce shedding of SARS-CoV-2. Here we investigate whether intranasally administered ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 reduces shedding, using a SARS-CoV-2 virus with the D614G mutation in the spike...




					www.biorxiv.org
				



DOI: 10.1101/2021.01.09.426058


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 13, 2021)

elbows said:


> UK trial of an inhalable drug:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You posted this back in March 2020, seems to have taken a long time, but finally it's in phase three trials.



> The UK has launched large-scale trials of a new drug that could cut the risk of Covid patients developing severe illness by as much as 80 per cent.
> 
> Thirty-four-year-old Alexandra Constantin became the first patient to receive the drug, produced by London-listed biotech firm Synairgen, after receiving the dose at Hull Royal Infirmary yesterday afternoon.
> 
> The phase three trials will see Synairgen’s inhaled formulation of a protein called interferon beta administered to more than 600 Covid patients who require supplemental oxygen.





> It is thought that the naturally-occurring protein, which is widely used in the treatment of multiple sclerosis , will stimulate the immune system and prime cells to fight off coronavirus.
> 
> Early findings suggested the treatment reduced the risk of a Covid-19 patient in hospital developing severe disease, such as requiring ventilation, by almost 80 per cent.
> 
> Results from phase two trials of around 100 patients last year also indicated “very significant” reductions in breathlessness, while the average time patients spent in hospital was reduced by a third — down from an average of nine days to six days.











						Covid: UK trials new drug that could cut risk of severe illness by 80 per cent
					

The UK has launched large-scale trials of a new drug that could cut the risk of Covid patients developing severe illness by as much as 80 per cent.




					www.cityam.com


----------



## Supine (Jan 14, 2021)

Leak of the Pfizer regulatory documents. If it's naughty to post this I will delete. Serious tech level info on the vaccine manufacturing and regulatory submission.





__





						PDF.js viewer
					





					wixlabs-pdf-dev.appspot.com


----------



## prunus (Jan 14, 2021)

Supine said:


> Leak of the Pfizer regulatory documents. If it's naughty to post this I will delete. Serious tech level info on the vaccine manufacturing and regulatory submission.



Fascinating, thanks.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 15, 2021)

Some evidence that NSAIDs _may_ modulate antibody response to both SARS-CoV-2 infection and SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations. The timing of use of NSAIDs during infection may need to be carefully considered. The impact of NSAIDs on the breadth, potency, and durability of infection and vaccine immune responses warrants further investigation.








						Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs Dampen the Cytokine and Antibody Response to SARS-CoV-2 Infection
					

Identifying drugs that regulate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and its symptoms has been a pressing area of investigation during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), which are frequently used for...



					jvi.asm.org
				



DOI: 10.1128/JVI.00014-21


----------



## teuchter (Jan 15, 2021)

UK now seems to have given about 5% of the population its first dose, which I'd say is not bad going.


----------



## elbows (Jan 15, 2021)

Cross convalescent plasma off the list.









						Covid: 'Convalescent plasma no benefit to hospital patients'
					

Donations of plasma from people who have recovered from the virus have been suspended.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Cloo (Jan 15, 2021)

Oh well, they can't all work


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2021)

teuchter said:


> UK now seems to have given about 5% of the population its first dose, which I'd say is not bad going.
> 
> View attachment 249059


the zionists not doing palestine, btw


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 15, 2021)

elbows said:


> Cross convalescent plasma off the list.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's sad, it sounded so promising.


----------



## elbows (Jan 15, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> That's sad, it sounded so promising.



Even worse if this treatment does turn out to have had a role in some of the mutations.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 15, 2021)

I wanted one of the journalists at today's press conference to ask: and what about second doses?


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 15, 2021)

weltweit said:


> I wanted one of the journalists at today's press conference to ask: and what about second doses?



Don't see the point tbh. They've made their rationale for delaying them clear enough. Whether they turn out to be right or not the question wouldn't bring out anything new at this point.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 15, 2021)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Don't see the point tbh. They've made their rationale for delaying them clear enough. Whether they turn out to be right or not the question wouldn't bring out anything new at this point.


I agree with inoculate as many people with the first dose as possible, but I also think you should do the second dose as the 12 weeks comes along. But it sounds like they are so keen on getting everyone a first dose that they seem to have forgotten they ought to budget time to do the second doses of those that have gone before to provide the full protection that the vaccine offers.


----------



## Cloo (Jan 15, 2021)

Telegraph claiming 70-somethings will be getting their dates for vaccination soon, so fingers crossed for both our sets of parents... although gsv's parents are now pretty sure they had it last month after his sister (who is in a bubble with them) tested positive after they'd felt pretty awful for a fortnight and everyone but them thought it was COVID. But at least we know they are safe-ish until they can be fully vaccinated by the sound of things.


----------



## wtfftw (Jan 16, 2021)

I've not been following this thread. Not after the first ten pages so apologies if this is already here.

Popped up in my Facebook feed. https://gb.c19proventstudy.com/?utm...gn=23846221664120534&atid=PROUKENMF0001948#!/
*What is the PROVENT Study?*
The PROVENT Study will research a combination of 2 investigational monoclonal antibodies for the prevention of COVID-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). The study is looking at how well the investigational antibodies work and how safe they are.


----------



## scifisam (Jan 16, 2021)

weltweit said:


> I wanted one of the journalists at today's press conference to ask: and what about second doses?



Very few people would be due them yet anyway.


----------



## SheilaNaGig (Jan 17, 2021)

It’s not clear whether other countries are seeing this with the Pfizer vaccine but it looks as if a problem has popped up in Norway.

Although 29 deaths amongst so many million world wide doses doesn’t look bad statistically, it’s something to be thinking of when weighing up the benefits for a particular elderly person with limited expectation of life span.





__





						Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
					





					www.bloomberg.com
				













						Covid-19: Norway investigates 23 deaths in frail elderly patients after vaccination
					

Doctors in Norway have been told to conduct more thorough evaluations of very frail elderly patients in line to receive the Pfizer BioNTec vaccine against covid-19, following the deaths of 23 patients shortly after receiving the vaccine.  “It may be a coincidence, but we aren’t sure,” Steinar...




					www.bmj.com
				










NB
the BMJ report is older, and the number of dead has since risen to 29. I’m adding in the link just because it’s the BMJ.


----------



## komodo (Jan 17, 2021)

Friend’s 80 plus Mum with some health issues is getting her 2nd dose this week - just the month interval.

My 93 year old Dad got his first dose today in his care home.


----------



## May Kasahara (Jan 17, 2021)

Spoke to my 70something dad today - both he and my nan (90) have had their first jabs


----------



## Poot (Jan 19, 2021)

I need advice.

I've signed up to be a guinea pig for new vaccine out but I can back out. I've been sent the info and there is a 50% chance that I'd get a placebo. 

The placebo is worrying me. The study is 2 years and 3 months long - so potentially that amount of time with no vaccine for me. 

I know there are lots of pointy heads here who can tell me in a scientific way whether it's worth the risk (i'd really like to help but I'd also really like not to end up with long covid or worse.) I am generally fit and well.


----------



## LDC (Jan 19, 2021)

Poot said:


> I need advice.
> 
> I've signed up to be a guinea pig for new vaccine out but I can back out. I've been sent the info and there is a 50% chance that I'd get a placebo.
> 
> ...



Why is the placebo worrying you Poot ?

I did a trial that sounds like it might be the same one. When I was offered a vaccine (as a healthcare worker) I contacted the trial and they unblinded me and I found out I had the placebo (water) so then went and got the Pfizer vaccine. The advice if I had had the test vaccine would have been to not get the Pfizer on top of that.

So some of it depends on your age and risk and when you might get offered a 'real vaccine' outside the trial. Like if you're 65 and might get the vaccine soon then maybe it's not worth doing it unless you'll refuse the vaccine and stay with the trial. But if you're 35 and are unlikely to get the vaccine any time soon then maybe it's worth going anyway. But also you can talk to the trial team and they might have some useful advice for you.

Trials will also need some people to not get the vaccine and finish the trial, but they get useful data even if you do it for six months or so.


----------



## Cloo (Jan 19, 2021)

My parents have had their 'do you want to be vaccinated' message (answer, 'Hell yeah'). I am a bit worried about the lack of second jab til later given the evidence from Israel; I can still imagine the gov doing a U-turn on it however.


----------



## iona (Jan 19, 2021)

Poot said:


> I need advice.
> 
> I've signed up to be a guinea pig for new vaccine out but I can back out. I've been sent the info and there is a 50% chance that I'd get a placebo.
> 
> ...


Have you asked them what happens when you get offered another vaccine? The study I'm doing will unblind you if you ask, then give advice about whether you should have another vaccine if you hadn't had the placebo.


----------



## Poot (Jan 19, 2021)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Why is the placebo worrying you Poot ?
> 
> I did a trial that sounds like it might be the same one. When I was offered a vaccine (as a healthcare worker) I contacted the trial and they unblinded me and I found out I had the placebo (water) so then went and got the Pfizer vaccine. The advice if I had had the test vaccine would have been to not get the Pfizer on top of that.
> 
> ...



Ah. So if I was offered a vaccine later I could unblind myself? This is something I hadn't considered (it's a large doc and it makes quite dry reading and I hadn't realised this was an option. Will read up).

I suppose after all this time the worry about the placebo is largely psychological. I'd be scared of going out without protection!


----------



## Poot (Jan 19, 2021)

iona said:


> Have you asked them what happens when you get offered another vaccine? The study I'm doing will unblind you if you ask, then give advice about whether you should have another vaccine if you hadn't had the placebo.


I checked the document and it's really out of date! One of the FAQs is 'what happens if another Covid vaccine is made available to the public in the meantime?' The answer is that participants 'shouldn't be at a disadvantage.' I'll ask them.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 19, 2021)

Cloo said:


> My parents have had their 'do you want to be vaccinated' message (answer, 'Hell yeah'). I am a bit worried about the lack of second jab til later given the evidence from Israel; I can still imagine the gov doing a U-turn on it however.


I don't know what the evidence from Israel is, a first dose confers some protection and as far as I can tell UK gov hasn't said they won't do the second dose. They are just pushing to get the most people possible the first dose.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 19, 2021)

weltweit said:


> I don't know what the evidence from Israel is, a first dose confers some protection and as far as I can tell UK gov hasn't said they won't do the second dose. They are just pushing to get the most people possible the first dose.


Comments out of Israel suggest that the immune response to _one dose_ of Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 is disappointing, whilst immune response to the _second dose_ is very promising. There's no research or manufacturer's data in the public domain yet to support these specific claims though.


----------



## LDC (Jan 19, 2021)

Poot said:


> I checked the document and it's really out of date! One of the FAQs is 'what happens if another Covid vaccine is made available to the public in the meantime?' The answer is that participants 'shouldn't be at a disadvantage.' I'll ask them.



Is it Novavax?


----------



## LDC (Jan 19, 2021)

Poot said:


> Ah. So if I was offered a vaccine later I could unblind myself? This is something I hadn't considered (it's a large doc and it makes quite dry reading and I hadn't realised this was an option. Will read up).
> 
> I suppose after all this time the worry about the placebo is largely psychological. I'd be scared of going out without protection!



Unless you get another approved vaccine soon surely you won't be in a worse position though?


----------



## Poot (Jan 19, 2021)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Is it Novavax?


No it's Ensemble 2.


----------



## Poot (Jan 19, 2021)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Unless you get another approved vaccine soon surely you won't be in a worse position though?


Well 2 years and 3 months is a long time. I was hoping to have a vaccine before then! I've signed up anyway.


----------



## iona (Jan 19, 2021)

Poot said:


> No it's Ensemble 2.


That's the one I'm doing.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 20, 2021)

__





						Single Covid vaccine dose in Israel 'less effective than we thought' | Israel | The Guardian
					

Surge in infections dampens optimism over country’s advanced immunisation programme




					amp.theguardian.com
				




Not great news.


----------



## purenarcotic (Jan 20, 2021)

Badgers said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The vaccines didn’t ever claim full immunity though, even with the second dose. They claimed a significant reduction in the risk of severe disease / death. So I would expect people to still get it, but for it to not affect them as badly as it might have done. I could be wrong though.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 20, 2021)

purenarcotic said:


> The vaccines didn’t ever claim full immunity though, even with the second dose. They claimed a significant reduction in the risk of severe disease / death. So I would expect people to still get it, but for it to not affect them as badly as it might have done. I could be wrong though.



They are primarily supposed to stop people getting it at all as far as I understand it. That's what the % effective figure from the trials refers to. Of the people who did get it in the trials for all the vaccines the risk of severe illness was reduced as well but that's not the headline aim. None of them have clamed 100% effectiveness though so you're right that you'd expect some people to get it. What I think isn't clear is the effect of the single dose, both for getting it at all and for reducing the effect.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 20, 2021)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> They are primarily supposed to stop people getting it at all as far as I understand it.


You misunderstand then.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 20, 2021)

2hats said:


> You misunderstand then.



OK. Explain?


----------



## Supine (Jan 20, 2021)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> OK. Explain?



You can't stop anyone getting it. That's what masks etc are for. The vaccine is used to speed up the bodies ability to kill it off.


----------



## ice-is-forming (Jan 20, 2021)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Is it Novavax?



Looks like Australia may be edging towards Novavax. newsGP - Novavax candidate may prove best long-term solution for Australia


----------



## 2hats (Jan 20, 2021)

They are designed to reduce the severity of disease having been exposed to and having become infected by SARS-CoV-2.

In such circumstances they are not going to stop transmission (though it may be curbed to some degree) nor are they necessarily going to rid everyone of some longer term consequences of COVID.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 20, 2021)

I get my first dose on Friday. I am having a couple of days with no booze before. My immune system is a bit diminished and I need all the help I can get. 

My partner is a nurse and she and all of her colleagues got their first shot over the last week. Lots of reported adverse reactions. No idea of what % though.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 20, 2021)

An early, small study (16 participants from cohorts 18-55 and 56-85 years) indicating that the 2 dose regimen of Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 produces a strong neutralising response to B.1.1.7 suggesting it may not escape that particular vaccine.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.01.18.426984v1


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 20, 2021)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:
			
		

> They are primarily supposed to stop people getting it at all as far as I understand it.






			
				2hats said:
			
		

> You misunderstand then.






			
				Monkeygrinder's Organ said:
			
		

> OK. Explain?





Supine said:


> You can't stop anyone getting it. That's what masks etc are for. The vaccine is used to speed up the bodies ability to kill it off.



I'm *utterly* failing to undestand the meaning of the above exchanges 

I've read plenty about anti-Covid vaccines recently, but at *no* point did I gain _any_ impression that a vaccination against Covid still leaves you at risk of you being infected.

Within the efficacy percentages frequently discussed, anyway, and I appreciate that that's an important caveat ...  

And of course we don't know enough yet about how long vaccines will be effective for people.

Nor do we know enough yet about whether or not you can still transmit the virus after being vaccinated ......

Still, I very strongly suspect that Monkeygrinder's Organ is not alone in needing an explanation for the 'vaccines can't stop you being infected' bit! 

Out there in the 'real world', *loads* of those anticipating getting vaccinated, and *loads* of those who already have been vaccinated, will surely be ultra-disturbed if told that getting vaccinated won't stop you contracting it.

Where's the publicity for that? 

None of the above is about me seeing vaccinations as some 'magic bullet' that stop you needing to wear masks,, needing to distance yourself, needing to be generally very careful with hygiene, etc.

Of course all that is correctly going to be go on necessary, and quite rightly.

*But! *

I've never caught flu after having an (annually adapted/tweaked  ) flu vaccine, and I very much hope never to catch Covid after being vaccinated against that, later this year.

Maybe annually, too,  as time goes on! 

I really hope that I'm misundestanding here!! 
I'm a non-scientist, after all 

Please ecplain in easy-to-grasp terms, with not-too-majorly-technical sources.

Cheers


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 20, 2021)

*TLDR* : I too thought that the anti-Covid vaccines were meant to stop you gettimg Covid-infected.

Why don't they, if they don't???


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 20, 2021)

William of Walworth said:


> *TLDR* : I too thought that the anti-Covid vaccines were meant to stop you gettimg Covid-infected.
> 
> Why don't they, if they don't???



I think maybe my use of 'getting it' was a bit vague and that's where I've been picked up. To most people I think if you don't develop symptoms you'd be described as not getting the illness but I think the point is that without showing symptoms people can still be infected with the virus at some point, to some degree at least.


----------



## Supine (Jan 20, 2021)

William of Walworth said:


> *TLDR* : I too thought that the anti-Covid vaccines were meant to stop you gettimg Covid-infected.
> 
> Why don't they, if they don't???



If you have not been vaccinated the first time your body sees covid it spends days learning how to kill it. While it's doing this the virus is replicating. It's an arms race between growing amounts of virus in the body and the immune system.

If you get the vaccine you're basically giving your body some training. It learns how to kill covid. When you get some covid in you after vaccination the body goes straight to work killing it off. Because it hasn't needed to learn how to do it the race is won by the immune system much quicker. So quick in fact you don't even notice you had any if you're lucky. 

That's it in simple terms I think (I'm not a virologist or a doctor).


----------



## teuchter (Jan 20, 2021)

William of Walworth said:


> I've never caught flu after having an (annually adapted/tweaked  ) flu vaccine,


As I understand it - you quite possibly have caught flu, but the vaccine has prepared your immune system to get rid of it pretty quickly before it causes any unwelcome effects and therefore you are none the wiser.

Of course, other people having been vaccinated helps to make it less likely that you will be infected at all because those other people are unlikely to be carrying it for a long time or having symptoms that help spread it.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 20, 2021)

Thanks for those explanations folks, they make good sense


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 21, 2021)

At the hospital I had mine at yesterday the nurse I spoke to said they were doing 400 a weekday, and 500 on weekend days. Currently they're doing it for 12 hours a day, moving to 18 hours soon, so on paper 3,000-4,500 a week.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 21, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> At the hospital I had mine at yesterday the nurse I spoke to said they were doing 400 a weekday, and 500 on weekend days. Currently they're doing it for 12 hours a day, moving to 18 hours soon, so on paper 3,000-4,500 a week.



It's a massive operation. I felt a bit tearful when i got mine done at the hospital, not with relief, just the massive nature of it. It's not like getting the flu jab.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 21, 2021)

William of Walworth said:


> *TLDR* : I too thought that the anti-Covid vaccines were meant to stop you gettimg Covid-infected.
> 
> Why don't they, if they don't???


TL;DR = they don't (variously for reasons of vaccine design, overall efficacy, immune response, route of infection in the body).

The vaccines target SARS-CoV-2, the virus. They aim to reduce the severity of COVID-19, the disease that the virus can produce.

Even with a strong immune response to a vaccine, a virus quite likely will still infect you for some (varying) period of time. This is seen with a number of types of vaccine and their target viruses - they still infect the vaccinated, but the period of infection and/or degree of viral shedding _may_ be reduced to varying degrees. Some vaccines don't stop you from infecting others partly or at all, ie you still get infected. They simply prevent serious episodes of the disease the virus concerned can cause solely in the inoculated individual (for example - polio, diphtheria, measles, hepatitis B).

One of the reasons SARS-CoV-2 is considered a novel virus is because of the unusually high proportion of asymptomatic cases. This twinned with the high level of viral shedding very early on in the infection, in both asymptomatic and presymptomatic cases, is of course one reason why it has spread so effectively. (Even in asymptomatic cases COVID related lung damage has been seen in a significant number of individuals; likely there will be other consequences.)

From trials (for AZD1222, BNT162b2, mRNA-1273), the vaccination (ie that is providing you have all doses, which for those vaccines currently approved in the UK is two) will likely stop somewhere between 50% and 95% of the recipients from experiencing the symptoms of the disease ie COVID-19 (that 50-95% will vary with vaccine type, individual immune health, age, pre-existing conditions, viral load on exposure and timing of exposure with respect to the jabs; note that it is not untypical for 'real world' outcomes to be as good as clinical trial outcomes). So potentially anywhere up to 1 in 2 vaccinated people will still experience some COVID-19 symptoms. However, those same clinical trials suggest that they should prevent pretty much every case of serious disease (serious as in requiring professional medical assistance) - well at least to the level of resolution of those trials. That is what these vaccines have been designed to do (usual target is at least >=50% reduction in serious disease).

Because some vaccinated persons will still develop COVID, and also because SARS-CoV-2 is novel (as described above - viral shedding is observed in the asymptomatic as well as the presymptomatic), a not insignificant number of people, if not everyone, likely will still carry ('be infected') and shed the virus ('potentially be infectious') for some time following post-vaccination exposure to that virus. To what degree a given individual is thus infectious though is going to vary from case to case (just as we are seeing quite widely varying outcomes in response to apparent reinfections). Likely what the vaccine will probably be doing is hindering the progression of the infection from the upper respiratory tract (infected but less serious) to the lower respiratory tract (more severe symptoms and potential for complications, increased morbidities and fatalities). As such people will still become 'infected'.

Indeed, some of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine trials have attempted to begin to try to get a handle on the potential they have, if any, for reduction in transmission. Whilst the data on that was limited and largely inconclusive (still is right now) what it does clearly demonstrate is that vaccinated persons can still be infected and harbour the virus (upper respiratory tract viral loads were measurable).

We won't really have a feel for how these vaccines curb transmission, if at all, until some time down the road when we can compare the situation 'on the ground' with models of 'vaccine reduces transmission by N% (for 0<N<100)'.

Recent Scientific American article that touches upon some of these issues.








						Vaccines Need Not Completely Stop COVID Transmission to Curb the Pandemic
					

Lessons from other viruses show that even if vaccines don’t completely stop disease spread, they can still successfully contain it




					www.scientificamerican.com


----------



## elbows (Jan 21, 2021)

2hats said:


> One of the reasons SARS-CoV-2 is considered a novel virus is because of the unusually high proportion of asymptomatic cases.



I have always used the term novel virus as a result of the virus either being new to human understanding, or being new to our immune systems. Other interesting aspects of the virus, its effect on humans, its ability to confound some dull and narrow expectations didnt really come into the equation when deciding whether to use the term novel. If its a novel virus in terms of our immune systems then it has pandemic potential, and thats why I'd call it a novel virus.

Nor do I believe that the proportion of asymptomatic cases is actually unusual or unexpected. I am painfully aware that various experts and sides of the orthodoxy had other impressions, but from the word go I always considered that to be because of a bias against accepting very inconvenient truths that had massive implications for what sort of response would be required. But not all the experts downplayed the asymptomatic side of things initially, and I did not come up with my own novel ideas about this, I was just prepared to accept some early data and anecdotes and expert views whilst having a lower regard for others. And I picked an established side that seemed more likely to be in touch with reality and not so much in denial, and that were in tune with my pre-concieved notions that were developed long before this particular pandemic. This approach was not without its downsides, for example my beliefs about this side of things caused me to reject early WHO China report findings that there were very few asymptomatic cases in China. I was openly skeptical about that at the time, February 2020, and on that occasion I happened to make the right choice and looked like I knew what I was talking about, but it was a risk, I could have been completely wrong.

For some background to what I'm saying, just do a few random internet searches for things like proportion of asymptomatic cases with influenza. Whenever I've done that in the past, I end up with a very wide range of possible results, and all sorts of indicators that nowhere near enough research had been done to improve the quality of findings in this area.

It does get even more complicated when it comes to more specific issues such as how much transmission occurs in asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic cases. It is possible that SARS-Cov-2 is special and not typical in that regard. But its also possible people were just ignoring asymptomatic transmission of flu etc in the past. So there are some very definite limits to how much reasonably secure knowledge we had about these things prior to this pandemic. I'd say that at a minimum there were good reasons to expect to find a much more significant role than some wanted to assume was the case in the past, and that this pandemic certainly gave a much needed sense of urgency to research in this area. I cannot honestly say that anything discovered so far about how much of an issue this stuff is has actually been surprising to me at all.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 21, 2021)

wrong thread.


----------



## elbows (Jan 21, 2021)

elbows said:


> I have always used the term novel virus as a result of the virus either being new to human understanding, or being new to our immune systems. Other interesting aspects of the virus, its effect on humans, its ability to confound some dull and narrow expectations didnt really come into the equation when deciding whether to use the term novel. If its a novel virus in terms of our immune systems then it has pandemic potential, and thats why I'd call it a novel virus.



I should also have said that this wasnt me trying to come up with my own special approach either. I used the term novel virus in that specific, limited context because thats how I'd seen others using it in the literature. Which is not to say that the word novel cannot be used in other ways too, eg I would have a different view if it was used in the literature as part of a sentence such as 'the virus appears to have some novel characteristics'.

Nothing novel about how tedious I can be!


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 21, 2021)

elbows ,: not tedious at all IMO! 

This thread's recent discussion about the nature of the coronavirus as a virus, and how infection happens, and (most importantly IMO  ) how vaccines work, has been absolutely fascinating for me.

I learnt an incredible amount from 2hats ' excellent post just before (I read that Scientific American article as well).

It's really worth non-scientists making more efforts to grasp this stuff. Thanks, everyone.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 21, 2021)

I think plenty of people on Urban and generally, are very prone to noticing (and even dwelling on) potentually bad news about vaccines.

I've lost almost all optimism concerning nearly everything else Covid-related  -- today's unsurprising 'big Festival'  news didn't help , fully expected though it was.

But I retain plenty of optimism about the vaccines (science can update them, man!!) and even about the (UK) logistics of distributing them in coming weeks and months


----------



## mx wcfc (Jan 21, 2021)

William of Walworth said:


> I think plenty of people on Urban and generally, are very prone to noticing (and even dwelling on) potentually bad news about vaccines.
> 
> I've lost almost all optimisism concerning neraly everything else Covid-related  -- today's unsurprising 'big Festival'  news didn't help , fully expected though it was.
> 
> But I retain plenty of optimism about the vaccines (science can update them, man!!) and even about the (UK) logistics of distributing them in comiog weeks and months


How do you feel about Bearded in September?  And Something Else?

I have rolled over tickets for both,   I think they _*could*_ happen, and I'm hanging onto that.

Attila hasn't said anything about Glastonwick, which is early June.  I assume that's not happening.  Or Naughty Corner, also June.

I also have a Gail's 50th ticket for early July.  I fear that will fail now.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 21, 2021)

mx wcfc : I'm reluctant to say much yet.
Emphasis on 'yet'!  ... but I can't help saying stuff about my favourite subject! 

I need to update myself on what Gail's been saying on Facebook lately about her events.

Given the tiny size of Something Elses, she may well have a better chance of her end-of-September end-of-season bash happening.

As for Bearded, theoretcially to be in September ..... who knows?

While stuff I've seen from the BT organisers sounds optimistic for now, they are deliberately avoiding confirming the line-up untl April ... time will tell!, etc., etc.


----------



## Supine (Jan 22, 2021)

This isn't the festival thread


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 22, 2021)

Supine said:


> This isn't the festival thread



OK, Grumpy!!  

I was directly asked a question, and unfortunately, diversions/mini-derails sometimes happen in threads 

It's not like I haven't contributed plenty of on-topic, vaccine-specific stuff on this thread generally.

And when/whether festivals happen this year just might bear a little bit of relation to the vaccine programme too


----------



## Supine (Jan 22, 2021)

William of Walworth said:


> OK, Grumpy!!
> 
> I was directly asked a question, and unfortunately, diversions/mini-derails sometimes happen in threads
> 
> ...



I'm grumpy because my festival season isn't looking good


----------



## ice-is-forming (Jan 24, 2021)

This is  Australias delivery strategy. I think that it'll work. Where GPs can't reach.. I think that's there's _more_ than enough humanitarian,  government, health, business, philanthropic, peer, community  & charitable practises etc.. that  will make it work between them. 

Similar to what happens in a declared disaster here. 



Spoiler: Every one mucks in



Everyone mucks in ! I'm actually a red cross volunteer who sets up & manages evacuation centres. I've been  stood up for about 10 months now, not to manage evacuation centres,  but to manage quarantine centres. I think in Brisbane alone there's about 3000 people in quarantine hotel, and RC are taking care of the logistics and mental health of the the event. Plus witnessing that international humanitarian law is not broken.. I haven't been activated to go because they have enough , and also I haven't volunteeed because I'm in an essential role in a regional area of Qld.  Our government are discussing using empty mining camps, even Christmas island (!) rather than hotels. In some cases this is already this case, and the hotels ( the 'residents' being people who've flown into Aus) are in urban areas like Brisbane/gold coast in Qld. And are some of them complaining! And bloody hell! Thank goodness Aus put them in full quarantine  otherwise a lot more of them would have it.  Just search for Australia Opens Quarantine ! The Australian Open hasn't even started yet and already it has become a tour de force for players and officials A logistical nightmare for the worship of sport.



But  Vacinne related, sorry for the veer off course. 

WHAT I wanted to better understand is... If either of the above named vaccines are safe for someone on a DMARD ? 2hats Edie   et al, please & thank you. I have searched and it just seems to be the science about it being live/not live. It's not live

_The good news about the COVID-19 vaccine is that none of the vaccines that will be used in Australia are live … and theoretically they could be used in immunocompromised people," Professor Macartney said_

What's this *theory" he's talking about? 

Does a person who has an autoimmune disorder have to stop their immunosuppressant before having the vaccination, I'm gonna assume this is a yes. And if they do have to stop it for a while to be vaccinated, then are
 they  - as a person with an autoimmune disorder,  on no immunosuppressents  - likely to have what negative  outcomes from  that. 

Also..

If someone's vaccinated, do they also shed/pass on a less fierce variant.


----------



## Mation (Jan 24, 2021)

ice-is-forming said:


> If someone's vaccinated, do they also shed/pass on a less fierce variant.


Are you asking here whether the vaccine might cause the virus to mutate into a less virulent form (variant) before it's shed/passed on, or whether the vaccine causes less shedding and therefore might result in a smaller viral load (of the same variant) passed on to someone you infect?

If the latter, I'm not sure anyone is in a position to answer that yet. The former hadn't occurred to me at all before now (and I'm certainly in no position to have any idea of an answer). 

Someone who knows more than me: is it something that can happen as a result of vaccination - a vaccine accelerating mutation in the direction of reduced virulence?


----------



## ice-is-forming (Jan 24, 2021)

Mation said:


> Are you asking here whether the vaccine might cause the virus to mutate into a less virulent form (variant) before it's shed/passed on, or whether the vaccine causes less shedding and therefore might result in a smaller viral load (of the same variant) passed on to someone you infect.
> 
> If the latter, I'm not sure anyone is in a position to answer that yet. The former hadn't occurred to me at all before now (and I'm certainly in no position to have any idea of an answer).
> 
> Someone who knows more than me: is it something that can happen as a result of vaccination - a vaccine accelerating mutation in the direction of reduced virulence?



Both


----------



## elbows (Jan 24, 2021)

ice-is-forming said:


> WHAT I wanted to better understand is... If either of the above named vaccines are safe for someone on a DMARD ? 2hats Edie   et al, please & thank you. I have searched and it just seems to be the science about it being live/not live. It's not live
> 
> _The good news about the COVID-19 vaccine is that none of the vaccines that will be used in Australia are live … and theoretically they could be used in immunocompromised people," Professor Macartney said_
> 
> ...



I would expect the theory is very much related to it not being a live vaccine, which is why you keep finding stuff about live vaccines when searching this topic. If it were a live vaccine then there would be risks that the live virus in the vaccine would have bad consequences for people with suppressed immune systems, it could be as bad for them as if they'd caught the virus itself naturally.

The fact it isnt live removes that issue, but some other issues remain. There will be some remaining theoretical risk that the vaccine could prompt an immune response that causes their underlying immune condition to flare up, or for the balance of this sytem to be effected in some way. And there will also be a great deal of uncertainty about how well the vaccine will offer protection. And thats not a simple binary question, it may still confer some protection but not as much, for example.

As for whether people stop taking their immunosuppressive drugs when being vaccinated, I'm not a doctor, but my default assumption would certainly not be a yes to that one. If a particular drug regime has balanced a persons system and managed their condition, then messing around with that is asking for trouble. Maybe the risk is deemed worth it for certain conditions but not others, I dont know. Maybe advice about what people should do if they catch something in normal times is a clue, eg if someone is on a drug regime which they are told to temporarily stop if sick, then maybe its an option to stop for a little bit when vaccinated too, but maybe not even that.

For vaccines that dont involve a live virus component, there shouldnt be any shedding of the virus because that person doesnt have the virus. Concerns about vaccine-related mutations are more about the pressure the virus in general comes under when more and more people have some immunity against it, whether that immunity was the result of a vaccine or being infected. Mutations happen all the time. If a particular mutation happens under those conditions, and the nature of the mutation means that it just happens that it can get round existing immunity, then that version of the virus ends up with a significant advantage because it can spread in groups that are immune to other versions of the virus. Aside from that major mutation phenomenon, there are other variations on this theme that can involve individuals with compromised immune systems. eg if they are infected for a very long time and have been experimentally treated with blood plasma from someone who had the virus and recovered. Under those conditions the treatment might kill other versions of the virus in their system but wont kill any versions with particular mutations that have popped up that just happen to escape the antibodies that patient received from someone elses blood. And then the patient could start shedding that version of the virus for ages and we end up with a new strain that can bypass immunity. But although vaccines could play a role in creating a similar sort of selection pressure, by forcing the wild virus to adapt to get round all the immune people it meets, this can only happen as a result of people being exposed to the virus. And they arent exposed to the virus via these non-live vaccines. So for example I have far more concerns about mutations in countries that are doing vaccination at the same time as they have so much virus spreading in the community (eg UK), than I do about countries which have managed to keep outbreaks of the virus down to a minimum (eg Australia).


----------



## ice-is-forming (Jan 24, 2021)

Thank you elbows


----------



## nyxx (Jan 24, 2021)

Has someone posted this article here yet?
On delaying the second dose of the vaccines:









						British Medical Association says 12-week Pfizer vaccine dose gap is ‘difficult to justify’
					

The British Medical Association (BMA) has called on England’s Chief Medical Officer to reduce the gap between the first and second doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccination, stating that it is "difficult to justify"




					inews.co.uk
				




A lot of argument in that article seems to hinge on “no one else is doing this” - which would be much stronger if there was any detail on why other countries aren’t extending the gap in doses. But there isn’t. Can anyone give context that would give more weight to this argument?

Fwiw. To me it sounded like a dangerous step to take, but most of what I’ve read about it (including this thread) the general consensus from people who have much higher level of knowledge on this stuff seems to be along the lines of we can see the logic and what’s being balanced, it’s a bit of a gamble but looks reasonable odds, we just have to wait and see. Which is reassuring to some degree, but I’m still somewhat concerned tbh. In no small part because I don’t have that much trust that the second doses will appear / the goalposts won’t be moved again when 12 weeks comes around.


----------



## nyxx (Jan 24, 2021)

Also 
If it is a really bad idea to change the timing of the doses of the pfizer & astrazeneca vaccines, what good will it do us to know that, if we don’t have any power to change it?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 25, 2021)

Looks like the UK has now passed the 10 doses per 100 people mark.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 25, 2021)

Moderna have published the results of a study into the efficacy of their mRNA-1273 vaccine with respect to recent variants B.1.1.7 ("UK") and B.1.351 ("South African"). DOI: 10.1101/2021.01.25.427948

In summary, it was found to be as effective against B.1.1.7 as earlier variants (D614G based) but immunity response was down six-fold against B.1.351. Moderna, state that whilst they think the response will still be effective, they are investigating the possibility of adding an additional booster dose to address waning immunity.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 25, 2021)

I think I heard that government has found 70 odd cases of B.1.351 (SA) in the UK. They said enhanced track and trace was being used and they hoped to contain it, but 70 cases is already a lot to trace. Worries me.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 25, 2021)

weltweit said:


> I think I heard that government has found 70 odd cases of B.1.351 (SA) in the UK. They said enhanced track and trace was being used and they hoped to contain it, but 70 cases is already a lot to trace. Worries me.


Geographic distribution of B.1.351 sequenced thus far.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 25, 2021)

2hats said:


> Geographic distribution of B.1.351 sequenced thus far.
> View attachment 251368


That looks rather more "established" than I had hoped.


----------



## souljacker (Jan 25, 2021)

Possible good news on the effect of the vaccine from Israel. Big drop in hospitalisations for vaccinated over 60's.









						Israel sees 60% drop in hospitalizations for age 60-plus 3 weeks after 1st shot
					

Full effects of Pfizer’s shots only kick in around a month after inoculation, but data from Israel shows there is a stark drop in infections even before that point




					www.timesofisrael.com


----------



## Supine (Jan 25, 2021)

Merck vaccines failed









						Merck Discontinues Development of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 Vaccine Candidates; Continues Development of Two Investigational Therapeutic Candidates
					

Merck Discontinues Development of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 Vaccine Candidates; Continues Development of Two Investigational Therapeutic Candidates



					www.businesswire.com


----------



## Wilf (Jan 25, 2021)

souljacker said:


> Possible good news on the effect of the vaccine from Israel. Big drop in hospitalisations for vaccinated over 60's.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I might be getting my vaccines mixed up, but wasn't the pfizer one implicated in the deaths of older people in Norway?


----------



## nyxx (Jan 26, 2021)

Wilf said:


> I might be getting my vaccines mixed up, but wasn't the pfizer one implicated in the deaths of older people in Norway?



some detail about this here:








						Covid-19: Norway investigates 23 deaths in frail elderly patients after vaccination
					

Doctors in Norway have been told to conduct more thorough evaluations of very frail elderly patients in line to receive the Pfizer BioNTec vaccine against covid-19, following the deaths of 23 patients shortly after receiving the vaccine.  “It may be a coincidence, but we aren’t sure,” Steinar...




					www.bmj.com


----------



## Badgers (Jan 26, 2021)

Thread...


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 26, 2021)

I haven't time just now to (re?)-read the Lancet article linked to in James' thread, but other than that link, he does seem to be ranting rather than explaining much ..... 

Not quite getting this about Oxford/AstraZeneca at the moment?? I'm off to work soon, but help me out please? Cheers


----------



## Supine (Jan 26, 2021)

Badgers said:


> Thread...




Some more digging required on this subject. Did find this very quickly


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 26, 2021)

William of Walworth said:


> I haven't time just now to (re?)-read the Lancet article linked to in James' thread, but other than that link, he does seem to be ranting rather than explaining much .....
> 
> Not quite getting this about Oxford/AstraZeneca at the moment?? I'm off to work soon, but help me out please? Cheers



A German reporter posted a tweet and article about the vaccine only being 8% effective for over 65s but he's not actually provided any science or sources so fuck him.


----------



## Pingety Pong (Jan 26, 2021)

Artaxerxes said:


> A German reporter posted a tweet and article about the vaccine only being 8% effective for over 65s but he's not actually provided any science or sources so fuck him.




But it was published in the Handelsblatt (a bit like the Financial Times) and I don't think they would just publish any old crap without any substance to it, so this is worrying.


----------



## platinumsage (Jan 26, 2021)

Pingety Pong said:


> But it was published in the Handelsblatt (a bit like the Financial Times) and I don't think they would just publish any old crap without any substance to it, so this is worrying.



It’s a Brian O’Hanrahanhrahan moment.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 26, 2021)

That doesn't surprise me.
The pandemic has highlighted the non specialist media's hopeless skills at understanding and reporting numbers accurately.


----------



## Pingety Pong (Jan 26, 2021)

Other German papers though (ok, the Bild  ) are reporting as well that the AZ won't be approved for the over 65s by the EMA. I suppose we will know more by Friday.


----------



## elbows (Jan 26, 2021)

Vaccines working less well in older people is a sort of default assumption that people might expect to see in general with vaccines (nothing specific to this pandemic). But such assumptions should always be placeholders that real data will replace eventually. And its too easy for me to leap to conclusions when I see a news item that seems to align with these broad assumptions. So I will keep an open mind.

The broader topic can be annoying. For example the routine yearly influenza vaccines became extremely rubbish at preventing some strains of influenza in older people, and data suggesting that was available for years. But the authorities etc never really drew any attention to it at all, and the issue was obfuscated, until they were ready to offer a different influenza vaccine for older people that in theory should offer more protection.

This stuff is one of the reasons I fret about people treating vaccination as a silver bullet. But its not the only one, and its not a prediction.


----------



## elbows (Jan 26, 2021)

Plus the politics of vaccine supplies is really heating up in a bad way right now, so I have to also consider the possibility of politics distorting the landscape.


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Jan 26, 2021)

SARS-CoV2 induced respiratory distress: Can cannabinoids be added to anti-viral therapies to reduce lung inflammation?
					






					www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov


----------



## Indeliblelink (Jan 26, 2021)

No data suggesting lower efficacy of AstraZeneca vaccine: German health ministry
					

There is no data that would suggest efficacy of only 8% among older people for AstraZeneca's COVID-19 vaccine, the German health ministry said on Tuesday in response to corresponding media reports.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Supine (Jan 26, 2021)

Looks like some kind of jelly like sea creature from ibiza could be useful. Random remedy of the day.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 26, 2021)

May be bullshit, but a story about Olympic athletes getting the vaccine to allow the games to go ahead in the Summer:
Mo Farah claims Olympic athletes have been told they will get Covid vaccines | Tokyo Olympic Games 2020 | The Guardian 

My first reaction was if this was true, they wouldn't extend it to cleaners, catering staff and others who keep the games going. Then, on reflection, they'd probably have to vaccinate all those people to avoid an outbreak across the Olympics venues.  Anyway, it's the first story I've seen of what will no doubt be a trend: 'oh, we've got to vaccinate _those people_ out of turn'.


----------



## zora (Jan 26, 2021)

Just had a voicemail from St Thomas' hospital about the Janssen Ensemble 2 study that people here have mentioned.

I am very much having second and third thoughts now...

First, I hate medical procedures - it always takes three different nurses/doctors and three laborious attemps to have any blood taken; might have to ask iona to be my personal phlebotomist!
Second, I am quite happy avoiding the outside world, so throwing myself into high-risk covid environments like a hospital without medical necessity...I am not sure...
Third, is there any point if I might have to unblind myself in a few months time anyway when I will hopefully be offered one of the current vaccines? (Actually, I think that got answered upthread, that even doing it for a few months might still provide useful data).
Forth, but actually possibly first, something I don't want to discuss here.
Fifth, what Poot mentioned about future vaccinations. Just read an article by a man in his 70s today who was on a trial, got unblinded after being offered the vaccine, turns out he had the trial vaccince (I think Janssen as for this study) for which efficacy isn't yet known, but there is uncertainty about how good it would be to have another different vaccine on top of it immediately.

So the only thing in the "pro" column is feeling useful. All I have been able to contribute to the pandemic fighting efforts so far is to isolate the hell out of myself to try and not catch and spread the virus...
Oh, and the 50/50 chance of getting a (hopefully efficacious) vaccine several months before I otherwise might.

Do you know, Poot and iona how many appointments you are expected to attend?

Hmmm, I think I am leaning quite strongly towards no atm, especially as this study seems mainly to research a different dosage regime, if I understand correctly, and the "main" study for the single dose vaccine is all but completed.

^^^Composed this post earlier this afternoon and am now wobbling a bit more again, maybe wanting to do it. So right now my uppermost concern would be the risk of catching covid in a healthcare setting.

They did ask in their voicemail for me to call back, or to text if I am no longer interested, so I feel I should make a decision and let them know in the morning.


----------



## Poot (Jan 26, 2021)

zora said:


> Just had a voicemail from St Thomas' hospital about the Janssen Ensemble 2 study that people here have mentioned.
> 
> I am very much having second and third thoughts now...
> 
> ...


Your concerns should be taken seriously. 

I went yesterday and am now on the vaccine trial. My biggest problem was the technology because I am old and stupid. Other than that it was a piece of cake and everyone was lovely but it was quite time consuming (2.5 hours). I answered a million personal questions, they took blood, gave me a covid test and a pregnancy test (used the words 'miracles do happen then giggled copiously when telling me it was negative    ) then injected me with what I am 80% sure was a placebo.

I am fine and have a bag of oximeter, thermometer etc and an app that I am crap at using but that's my fault. You get prompted about what you have to do. But it does go on for months, I won't lie. My next appt is in March (I have a phone appt in Feb).

Give it some thought. I am lucky because my family will be vaccinated eventually and I think herd immunity will mostly be in place by then but I will probably get unblinded if I am offered the vaccine. It won't matter by then because my vaccine is probably ages away!


----------



## zora (Jan 26, 2021)

Poot said:


> Your concerns should be taken seriously.
> 
> I went yesterday and am now on the vaccine trial. My biggest problem was the technology because I am old and stupid. Other than that it was a piece of cake and everyone was lovely but it was quite time consuming (2.5 hours). I answered a million personal questions, they took blood, gave me a covid test and a pregnancy test (used the words 'miracles do happen then giggled copiously when telling me it was negative    ) then injected me with what I am 80% sure was a placebo.
> 
> ...



Ah that's super helpful, thank you! On reading that my first thoughts are that I do like the idea of the gift of an oximeter, but very much dislike the thought of sitting in an appointment for 2.5 hrs . Probably wouldn't do my current anxiety levels any favours. 
Will do some more mulling over!


----------



## Supine (Jan 26, 2021)

Sanofi faced some delays in their vaccine development work some time ago. They have just agreed to produce 100 million doses of the BioNTech vaccine at their German plant. Basically using their manufacturing capability for another companies product while they continue with dev work.

Its great to see rivals working together to get product to market


----------



## LDC (Jan 27, 2021)

zora said:


> Just had a voicemail from St Thomas' hospital about the Janssen Ensemble 2 study that people here have mentioned.
> 
> I am very much having second and third thoughts now...
> 
> ...



It's a bit time comsuming and there's some risk and effort involved, but that's not new. Maybe don't do it if you're already stressing about it.


----------



## zora (Jan 27, 2021)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> It's a bit time comsuming and there's some risk and effort involved, but that's not new. Maybe don't do it if you're already stressing about it.



I don't know if your post is meant to read as abrasively as it reads to me, but I don't think it's unreasonable to have conflicting thoughts and feelings about a decision like this.
Indeed I am coming down on the side of "it's probably not right for me at this time", given the worry it might cause me (and for another personal reason).
But I was also excited about the potential opportunity (on a personal level and to contribute something). 
And the risk-cost-benefit analysis seems to me to be very much a changing field - in terms of the risk of picking up covid in a healthcare setting while cases are this rife, how many vaccines are already available, and how much this particular trial seems to add in terms of usefulness among other things.


----------



## zora (Jan 27, 2021)

dp


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 27, 2021)

zora said:


> I don't know if your post is meant to read as abrasively as it reads to me, but I don't think it's unreasonable to have conflicting thoughts and feelings about a decision like
> this.
> Indeed I am coming down on the side of "it's probably not right for me at this time", given the worry it might cause me (and for another personal reason).
> But I was also excited about the potential opportunity (on a personal level and to contribute something).
> And the risk-cost-benefit analysis seems to me to be very much a changing field - in terms of the risk of picking up covid in a healthcare setting while cases are this rife, how many vaccines are already available, and how much this particular trial seems to add in terms of usefulness among other things.



With the doubts you have, it does seem reasonable not to go ahead, TBH.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 27, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> Another possible treatment drug is going to trial.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The REGEN-COV trials continue, and are looking positive, and it could be approved in the next few months.



> The makers of an experimental drug, now being trialled by the NHS, say it is 100 per cent effective in protecting against symptomatic cases of the virus.
> 
> US-based Regeneron Pharmaceuticals says its two-antibody cocktail called REGEN-COV also reduces overall coronavirus infection rates by about 50 per cent.
> 
> The claims are based on interim results and the "confirmatory stage" of the trial will not be complete until the second quarter of this year, but the company has said it is hopeful it may "break the chain" of rising infections.











						COVID-19: Breakthrough treatment claims to stop 100%  of symptomatic infections
					

Makers say early tests of the experimental drug indicate it may "break the chain" of rising coronavirus infections.




					news.sky.com


----------



## 2hats (Jan 27, 2021)

The Imperial saRNA vaccine team has switched focus from phase III trials (phase II results due soon) to working on a single dose 'booster' vaccine that can rapidly target new variants and supplement previous vaccinations.








						Imperial vaccine tech to target COVID mutations and booster doses | Imperial News | Imperial College London
					

Imperial is focusing its RNA vaccine technology to target SARS-CoV-2 mutations, boosters and thermostability rather than an immediate efficacy trial.




					www.imperial.ac.uk
				



They are removing the cold chain that other RNA based vaccines require, storing at standard fridge temperatures, and looking to make a solid thermostable version that can be kept up to 40C. They are also investigating delivering it via a needle free method which would require minimal training. All developments to widen deployment, particularly in regions lacking the medical infrastructure/organisation (cold chains, highly trained staff, tracking and recall of patients).








						Vaccine collaboration could overcome cold chain issues for RNA-based vaccines | Imperial News | Imperial College London
					

Imperial vaccine researchers are collaborating with industry partners to develop RNA vaccines stable at temperatures up to 40C.




					www.imperial.ac.uk
				



FT article: 



Spoiler: content



Imperial College to target coronavirus mutations
London university ditches plans for efficacy trial to focus on developing next-generation jabs
Clive Cookson yesterday, FT

Imperial College London, once a leading UK contender in the Covid-19 vaccine race, has dropped plans for a large-scale efficacy trial this year.

Instead the university’s team will focus its RNA technology on developing next-generation jabs that would target coronavirus mutations and provide boosters for existing vaccines.

Professor Robin Shattock, the project leader, said the change of direction did not reflect disappointing results from phase 1 and 2 clinical trials, which have involved more than 400 volunteers.

“Although our first generation Covid-19 vaccine candidate is showing promise in early clinical development, the broader situation has changed with the rapid roll out of approved vaccines,” he said.

“It is not the right time to start a new efficacy trial for a further vaccine in the UK, with the emphasis rightly placed on mass vaccination in response to the rapid spread of the new variant.”

The Imperial technology is based on “self-amplifying RNA” or saRNA. This is similar to the mRNA vaccines from Moderna and BioNTech/Pfizer — injecting genetic instructions to make viral proteins, which prime the immune system to fight future infection.

But, unlike the others, the Imperial vaccine makes multiple copies of its RNA inside human cells, which means that much smaller doses are needed. Another difference is that it is stable at ordinary fridge temperatures and does not require storage in a deep freeze like other mRNA vaccines.

“We want to develop Imperial’s technology as a safety net to catch escape mutations, reach variants that other vaccines may not and meet potential needs for annual booster vaccinations,” Prof Shattock said. “We are also providing the UK with long-term capability in RNA vaccines for Covid-19 and other potential infectious threats.”

The Imperial scientists are already developing saRNA vaccines to target other lethal viruses that could pose pandemic risks to the world, including Ebola, Marburg and Lassa fever.

Last spring people were talking about the Imperial project alongside Oxford’s vaccine as the two great UK candidates to inoculate the world against Covid-19.

The Oxford vaccine proceeded faster, Prof Shattock said, both because its adenovirus-based technology was more advanced than Imperial’s saRNA and because it was much more generously funded by the government and its pharmaceutical industry partner AstraZeneca.

The same applied to the research and development investment by the US and German governments in the Moderna and BioNTech vaccines. “We received £18m last year from philanthropists and the UK government, which pales into insignificance compared to the billions paid to the others,” he said.

With RNA inoculation now certain to be a key strand in the future of the global vaccines industry, Prof Shattock said it was essential for the UK to build up development and production capacity in the area.

“We are already seeing that it is problematic to rely on vaccine manufacturing in Europe and elsewhere in the world,” he said. “The export restrictions being discussed this week should be a wake-up call.”

Doug Brown, chief executive of the British Society for Immunology, welcomed Imperial’s change of strategy. “The team there has clearly thought long and hard about this,” he said, “and it will be great to see their technology continue to develop”.


Interesting to note the relative development/funding costs thus far; Imperial's saRNA having received £18 million.





Source: BBC.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 27, 2021)

2hats any idea why the AZ one cost so much more than the others?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 27, 2021)

weltweit said:


> 2hats any idea why the AZ one cost so much more than the others?





The AZ one is being provided at cost, so around £3 a dose, Pfizer around £15 & Moderna £28.









						COVID-19 vaccines: How do the Moderna, Pfizer and Oxford coronavirus jab candidates compare?
					

Three vaccines set for use in the UK have all reported they are around 90% effective in late stage trials.




					news.sky.com
				




ETA - oh, sorry, you are talking about the investment rather the cost of doses, that's probably has a lot to do with how many doses have been pre-ordered, and investment in the manufacturing & supply chains.


----------



## Indeliblelink (Jan 27, 2021)

Oxford vaccine factory evacuated after 'suspicious package' was sent to site
					

A bomb disposal team has been called to the factory in which the Oxford vaccine is made after a suspicious package was reported.




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## elbows (Jan 27, 2021)

elbows said:


> Cross convalescent plasma off the list.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Followup to this story.

I'd heard nothing about it since, but just saw a NHS England advert on telly appealing for people to donate plasma. And then I searched online news for 'donate plasma' and got loads of local newspaper stories from a few days ago with the same appeal for donors. It seems they have a different sort of trial in mind this time.

Here is just one example of the sort of local news story I found:









						Liverpool people who have had Covid urged to come forward
					

A donation could be life-saving, experts say - as they encourage people to come forward




					www.liverpoolecho.co.uk
				






> Plasma donation was paused and then restarted last week as two trials of plasma use in hospital went into analysis.
> 
> They reported no overall benefit but analysis is ongoing for benefit in subgroups.
> 
> ...


----------



## 2hats (Jan 27, 2021)

weltweit said:


> 2hats any idea why the AZ one cost so much more than the others?


Can't find any published detailed budgetary breakdowns. To some degree development funding (AZ1222 > BNT162b2 > mRNA-1273) might perhaps influence final cost per dose (AZ1222 < BNT162b2 < mRNA-1273).


----------



## Supine (Jan 27, 2021)

Lots of factors are involved in unit cost.

Capital investment required, company overheads, materials, equipment utilisation, r&d debts owed before covid hit, access to manufacturing equipment, etc etc.

Oxford originally wanted to open source their vaccine but decided to get into bed with a big pharma company. That offered advantages in letting existing professionals setup the supply chain and worry about things like pharmacovigilance quickly i'd imagine.

Moderna is almost certainly more expensive because they're a relatively new company without an existing product base, so setting up a lot of stuff from scratch rather than utilising existing capacity.


----------



## Indeliblelink (Jan 27, 2021)

Preprint up with some more lab assay results from Pfizer on the BNT162b2 vaccine's effect on UK & SA variants. Limited study, only 20 people given doses three weeks apart in the initial trials and testing against bio-engineered versions of the virus that didn't have all the variants spike mutations. Sounds like a small drop in effectiveness against the UK and SA variants but by small enough margins it's not of too much concern. As usual "Clinical data are needed for firm conclusions about vaccine effectiveness against variant viruses."








						Neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 spike 69/70 deletion, E484K, and N501Y variants by BNT162b2 vaccine-elicited sera
					

We engineered three SARS-CoV-2 viruses containing key spike mutations from the newly emerged United Kingdom (UK) and South African (SA) variants: N501Y from UK and SA; 69/70-deletion+N501Y+D614G from UK; and E484K+N501Y+D614G from SA. Neutralization geometric mean titers (GMTs) of twenty...




					www.biorxiv.org


----------



## 2hats (Jan 28, 2021)

A virologist writes: _The case against delaying SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine boosting doses_ (DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciab070).

In summary:

lack of evidence for prime only vaccination, in particular for timescale for decay to sub-protective levels
potential for prime only acceleration of the erosion of vaccine potency
potential failure of prime only to address antigenic drift via somatic mutation
prime only partial immunity driving antigenic drift
reduction in transmission suppression in prime only regimens
"Ultimately, I do not think that otherwise highly effective vaccines should be used in altered and untested regimes that may not be effective and risk accelerating their obsolescence."


----------



## 2hats (Jan 28, 2021)




----------



## 2hats (Jan 28, 2021)

ROK also feel there is insufficient data from AZD1222 trials on over 65s for it to be used in those cohorts.








						South Korea reviews AstraZeneca vaccine for elderly under rollout plan
					

South Korea will review the use of AstraZeneca's COVID-19 vaccine for the elderly because of limited efficacy data, the government said on Thursday, as it unveiled a plan to inoculate 10 million high-risk people by July.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Wilf (Jan 28, 2021)

2hats said:


>



That's... interesting. My quick search suggests that GPs or vaccination centres will simply give out whichever vaccine they have at that point. However, there's a good chance it will be the above, because of storage issues (is that correct?). I don't want to encourage vaccine hesitancy, even on this thread, but you are allowed to have a quite rational moment of 'hesitancy' over this.  For example, I'm 60 and will be getting the jab mid March perhaps. Couple of underlying conditions but none of them are on the 'list', though I'm not allowed in work due to an occupational health assessment.  Don't want to make this about me and, unless anything much worse emerges about astrazeneca I'll have it. For me, it's literally antisocial not to have the vaccine, unless of course you have specific health reasons.  

Anyway, what I'm fumbling towards, is the issue of whether we can have a rational discussion about risk, without it generating conspira-shite and threatening the whole vaccination programme.  In turn, the government's appalling messaging on the pandemic is an issue with regard to trust and being treated as adults.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 28, 2021)

Supposedly this is from Germany's analysis of the results for the AZ vaccine.

It shows that in the over 65 group, 1 in 341 vaccine recipients got Covid-19, and 1 in 319 placebo recipients got it.

I can certainly see why you might look at that and decide there's no evidence of efficacy for that age group.

Presumably the approval in the UK relies on the trials indicating that it's _safe_ for the over-65s, and just hoping that the efficacy shown in younger age groups can be extrapolated to the over 65s, where the sample was too small to show an effect either way?


----------



## Supine (Jan 28, 2021)

teuchter said:


> Supposedly this is from Germany's analysis of the results for the AZ vaccine.
> 
> It shows that in the over 65 group, 1 in 341 vaccine recipients got Covid-19, and 1 in 319 placebo recipients got it.
> 
> ...



its also based on the over 65's showing a good immune response to the vaccine i believe.

i'd imagine a lot of >65's were hiding at home last year so less likely to catch covid / help the trial determine efficacy.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 28, 2021)

teuchter said:


> Supposedly this is from Germany's analysis of the results for the AZ vaccine.
> 
> It shows that in the over 65 group, 1 in 341 vaccine recipients got Covid-19, and 1 in 319 placebo recipients got it.
> 
> ...


The efficacy data from AZD1222 clinical trials for 65+ is not very substantive right now. To be fair to AstraZeneca they have always been quite clear that there is a paucity of data in those age groups. What the trial data do show though is an immune response (in sera) to the vaccine in 65+, but not quite as strong as in younger cohorts (to be expected). That's part of the basis for the JCVI/MHRA recommendations/approval. Precisely how that translates to efficacy is not straightforward and only further extensive trials will clarify.

Note that those German trial results for the 65+ cohort have huge confidence intervals, the sample in each group is small, and only one infection per group (vaccine recipients and control) implies there wasn't much exposure, so it doesn't really shed much light on those matters.

e2a: More results for AZD1222 from a US phase III trial of >30K participants are expected within the next couple of months.


----------



## elbows (Jan 28, 2021)

Well by starting outr vaccination programme at a time when viral prevalence has been very high, we'll probably soon have lots of real world data to analyse. Or perhaps not, if rates of infection fall very dramatically in a way that is sustained all the way down to low levels. I recall that they had some similar issues with the first wave diminishing in a manner that made it harder for them to get the desired numbers in some clinical trials.


----------



## magneze (Jan 28, 2021)

I think I know the answer but has any country nationalised vaccine production so it's no longer controlled by pharmaceutical companies?


----------



## platinumsage (Jan 28, 2021)

Novavax phase III trial success including against Kent and South African variants:

Is being manufactured in Teeside


----------



## Supine (Jan 28, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> Novavax phase III trial success including against Kent and South African variants:
> 
> Is being manufactured in Teeside




90% effective but only 49% against the B.1.351 variant. That included people with HiV so could partly explain the lower results. The vaccine is being reformulated for this mutation. Its looking likely that a booster every year or two will be required.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 28, 2021)

Supine said:


> 90% effective but only 49% against the B.1.351 variant. That included people with HiV so could partly explain the lower results. The vaccine is being reformulated for this mutation. Its looking likely that a booster every year or two will be required.


NVX-CoV2373 96% efficacy wrt B.1.117, 86% wrt B.1.1.7, 60% wrt B.1.351 all HIV-, 49% wrt B.1.351 with HIV+ members included. Large CIs for the B.1.351 results. No severe episodes of COVID-19 amongst the vaccinated.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 28, 2021)

Supine said:


> 90% effective but only 49% against the B.1.351 variant. That included people with HiV so could partly explain the lower results. The vaccine is being reformulated for this mutation. Its looking likely that a booster every year or two will be required.



The figures you mention from that tweet are (?) 'phase 2b' trials.

But do you know whether tweaks to the vaccine are allowed/likely to happen ahead of or during full-on phase 3 trials??


----------



## 2hats (Jan 29, 2021)

2hats said:


> NVX-CoV2373 96% efficacy wrt B.1.117, 86% wrt B.1.1.7, 60% wrt B.1.351 all HIV-, 49% wrt B.1.351 with HIV+ members included. Large CIs for the B.1.351 results. No severe episodes of COVID-19 amongst the vaccinated.


One other observation buried in the trial data: previous infection with earlier SARS-CoV-2 variants did not prevent reinfection with B.1.351. Novavax is already working on a bivalent vaccine to target both earlier variants and B.1.351.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2021)

The one shot Johnson & Johnson vaccine is looking promising.



> A fifth vaccine, made by the US company Johnson & Johnson, has shown efficacy against the coronavirus and could transform prospects for protecting both the UK and the rest of the world, because it needs only a single dose.
> 
> The vaccine, made by the US giant’s subsidiary Janssen, based in the Netherlands, was trialled in the UK – and the British government has bought 30m doses. The EU has ordered 400m doses.
> 
> The company said it had 72% efficacy in preventing Covid in the US but a lower rate of 66% was observed globally in the large trial conducted across three continents and against multiple variants.











						Johnson & Johnson one-dose Covid vaccine shown to work
					

UK has bought 30m doses of product that could transform world’s immunisation programmes




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## 2hats (Jan 29, 2021)

EMA approval for AZD1222 for use in anyone 18+ based on ~60% efficacy seen in trials on 18-55 year olds.
"However, protection is expected, given that an immune response is seen in this age group [>55] and based on experience with other vaccines".
EMA recommends COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca for authorisation in the EU - European Medicines Agency


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 29, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> The one shot Johnson & Johnson vaccine is looking promising.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Is it 'one dose' because there's something fundamentally different about it to the others, or just that they've decided to run one dose tests? Seems they're testing now whether two doses is better.


----------



## prunus (Jan 29, 2021)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Is it 'one dose' because there's something fundamentally different about it to the others, or just that they've decided to run one dose tests? Seems they're testing now whether two doses is better.



The latter, basically.  It's largely the same tech as the AZ one (don't know if J&J use an adjuvant as well maybe?)


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 29, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> The one shot Johnson & Johnson vaccine is looking promising


Might help take-up if there was a discreet rebranding, mind


----------



## Wilf (Jan 29, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> Might help take-up is there was a discreet rebranding, mind


Boris Johnson... one shot you say...


----------



## Indeliblelink (Jan 29, 2021)




----------



## 2hats (Jan 30, 2021)

mRNA vaccinations in children.








						U.S. likely to start COVID-19 vaccination in children by late spring or early summer - Fauci
					

The United States will likely start vaccinating children by late spring or early summer, top U.S. infectious disease expert Anthony Fauci said on Friday, as studies are underway to test the safety and effectiveness of Pfizer Inc and Moderna Inc's COVID-19 vaccines in children...




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Sunray (Jan 30, 2021)

I think there is real promise for the frighteningly expensive polyclonal antibody cocktail from Regeneron. The one that saved Trump.

It's being trialled in the UK. The Germans just bought a lot of doses for £1775 per dose. 

Hard to believe it's not working at least modestly well if they spent that much cash on it.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 30, 2021)

Sunray that is a stunning price. Amazed that anyone is placing any orders for that!


----------



## Supine (Jan 30, 2021)

weltweit said:


> Sunray that is a stunning price. Amazed that anyone is placing any orders for that!



Compare it to the cost of having someone in an ICU for a day and it's remarkably cost effective


----------



## weltweit (Jan 30, 2021)

Supine said:


> Compare it to the cost of having someone in an ICU for a day and it's remarkably cost effective


True enough, but compared to the at cost price Astra Zeneca of £3.00 per dose?


----------



## prunus (Jan 30, 2021)

weltweit said:


> True enough, but compared to the at cost price Astra Zeneca of £3.00 per dose?



Different things - one’s a vaccine the other a treatment. And you’d probably have to vaccinate more than 400 people to prevent one going into intensive care, so the cost comparison isn’t far away anyway.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 30, 2021)

prunus said:


> Different things - one’s a vaccine the other a treatment.


Oh aha, didn't realise. 



prunus said:


> And you’d probably have to vaccinate more than 400 people to prevent one going into intensive care, so the cost comparison isn’t far away anyway.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 30, 2021)

First major 'real world' vaccine performance study in. Here a retrospective cohort phase IV study of 2.6 million recipients of BNT162b2 in Israel. After the first jab, by 24 days, a relative risk reduction of 51% overall is seen, slightly lower (44%) in older (60+) cohorts (based on PCR confirmed infections), though that "might be an underestimation".
"Together our findings and the 95% efficacy shown in the phase III trial, suggest that the BNT162b2 vaccine should be administered in two doses to achieve maximum protection and impact in terms of disease burden reduction".
DOI: 10.1101/2021.01.27.21250612.


----------



## Sunray (Jan 30, 2021)

2hats said:


> First major 'real world' vaccine performance study in. Here a retrospective cohort phase IV study of 2.6 million recipients of BNT162b2 in Israel. After the first jab, by 24 days, a relative risk reduction of 51% overall is seen, slightly lower (44%) in older (60+) cohorts (based on PCR confirmed infections), though that "might be an underestimation".
> "Together our findings and the 95% efficacy shown in the phase III trial, suggest that the BNT162b2 vaccine should be administered in two doses to achieve maximum protection and impact in terms of disease burden reduction".
> DOI: 10.1101/2021.01.27.21250612.



I think this is the same as the Phase III trials.  The current idea is to stop people going into hospital when vaccine supply is limited.  

Then hope a second dose will be a booster when we get more vaccines.. I see the logic to this, we will see if this pays off in the coming month or two.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 30, 2021)

prunus said:


> The latter, basically.  It's largely the same tech as the AZ one (don't know if J&J use an adjuvant as well maybe?)


They tested adjuvants in earlier trials but I can't find one in the most recent phase III formulation.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 31, 2021)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Is it 'one dose' because there's something fundamentally different about it to the others, or just that they've decided to run one dose tests? Seems they're testing now whether two doses is better.


One reason for only developing and trialling single dose is to (try to) speed up delivery to market (short <1 month dosing windows were trialled for similar reasons - get results sooner).

But it also partly addresses a weakness of viral vector vaccines - which AZD1222 will likely suffer from (for example) - one of a limited window of utility arising from the immune response to the viral vector itself which can reduce the effectiveness of a second dose (or subsequent booster shots), homologous boosting, as your immune system attacks the vaccine undermining delivery of the immunogen payload (in part, if not all).

This can be addressed by using a different viral vector for each subsequent dose but the choice of viral vectors is limited. The Russian Sputnik V viral vector vaccine uses two different human adenoviruses for precisely this reason and this is quite possibly why the AZD1222 accidental half/full dose regime appeared to be more efficacious than full/full - the first half dose didn't prime the immune system to attempt to undermine the second to the same degree that the first full dose did. Indeed, there is work underway looking into using AZD1222 with Sputnik V to see if this heterologous boosting might make for a good two dose combination.

This is another big win for RNA and protein subunit platforms - there is no virus based vector 'vehicle' as such. So there are no viral vector antigens for the immune system to respond to, so no immunity to the vaccines themselves can be acquired and consequently there is no response to interfere with subsequent doses/boosters.


----------



## Cloo (Jan 31, 2021)

It seems to me like, when it comes to reopening society,  a lot hangs on whether, or the degree to which, vaccines inhibit infectiousness. I hope/presume someone, somewhere is monitoring this in vaccinated people? Would it be a case of 'backwards tracing'  and presumably you'd have to test a selection of vaccinated people regularly?


----------



## 2hats (Jan 31, 2021)

Cloo said:


> It seems to me like, when it comes to reopening society,  a lot hangs on whether, or the degree to which, vaccines inhibit infectiousness. I hope/presume someone, somewhere is monitoring this in vaccinated people? Would it be a case of 'backwards tracing'  and presumably you'd have to test a selection of vaccinated people regularly?


There are studies underway but it will take time for it to become apparent. It will most likely be achieved through modelling comparison rather than tracing individual cases: model various scenarios for differing degrees of vaccine acquired transmission reduction (0 to 100%) and then see which one fits what is being observed across the wider population.


----------



## platinumsage (Jan 31, 2021)

It’s inconceivable that there won’t be some effect on transmission, the question is to what extent.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 31, 2021)

Problems will include teasing out the effect from widespread changes in assorted policy changes and behaviours post-vaccination (can we say 'poor messaging'?) but also the almost inevitable growing selection pressure for escape mutations in populations where there has been a failure to pursue elimination (very likely already being seen elsewhere with respect to naturally acquired immunity in the face of E484K, L18F, K417N/T flavoured variants and friends).


----------



## Cloo (Jan 31, 2021)

2hats said:


> There are studies underway but it will take time for it to become apparent. It will most likely be achieved through modelling comparison rather than tracing individual cases: model various scenarios for differing degrees of vaccine acquired transmission reduction (0 to 100%) and then see which one fits what is being observed across the wider population.


Thanks, I gathered it was complicated and likely to take a while,  I guess if cases do drop off we might not really be able to tell until we get through next winter.


----------



## LDC (Jan 31, 2021)

Cloo said:


> It seems to me like, when it comes to reopening society,  a lot hangs on whether, or the degree to which, vaccines inhibit infectiousness. I hope/presume someone, somewhere is monitoring this in vaccinated people? Would it be a case of 'backwards tracing'  and presumably you'd have to test a selection of vaccinated people regularly?



I've been vaccinated and since then have had a test (negative) since had contact with positive case and had some symptoms. I've been asked by PHE and another body about this (as have others in similar situations I know) so does seem they are on it Cloo


----------



## Supine (Jan 31, 2021)

More vaccine manufacturing in the UK   









						UK begins production of Valneva COVID-19 vaccine
					

Since its initial partnership with the UK Government in September 2020, Valneva has started commercial manufacturing of its COVID-19 vaccine candidate...




					www.manufacturingglobal.com


----------



## Cloo (Jan 31, 2021)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> I've been vaccinated and since then have had a test (negative) since had contact with positive case and had some symptoms. I've been asked by PHE and another body about this (as have others in similar situations I know) so does seem they are on it Cloo


Thanks, interesting to know - hope you stay feeling OK.


----------



## StoneRoad (Jan 31, 2021)

Hmmm ...

Whilst half-asleep this morning, I'm sure I heard an ad on the radio asking for males who have recently recovered from Covid to donate blood plasma for antibody treatments.

I was under the impression that this "convalescent plasma" treatment was considered largely in-effective ?


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 31, 2021)

Supine said:


> More vaccine manufacturing in the UK
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Seems they're a very long way from being able to roll them out though: Valneva completes recruitment for Phase I/II COVID-19 vaccine study - only just recruited for phase 1 trials.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 31, 2021)

StoneRoad said:


> I was under the impression that this "convalescent plasma" treatment was considered largely in-effective ?


There are other trials underway investigating efficacy for specific subgroups and use in very early stage infection.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 31, 2021)

Israeli vaccination programme 'exit plan' timetable being challenged by new variants (B.1.1.7), and perhaps lockdown violations.








						Israel extends lockdown, sees delay in COVID-19 turnaround
					

Israel extended a national lockdown on Sunday as coronavirus variants offset its vaccination drive and officials predicted a delay in a turnaround from the health and economic crisis.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Cloo (Jan 31, 2021)

Trouble is in Israel the ultra-Orthodox have historically been treated with kid gloves and made an exception for for various things, but they need to be fucking come down on hard for this stuff.


----------



## elbows (Jan 31, 2021)

StoneRoad said:


> Hmmm ...
> 
> Whilst half-asleep this morning, I'm sure I heard an ad on the radio asking for males who have recently recovered from Covid to donate blood plasma for antibody treatments.
> 
> I was under the impression that this "convalescent plasma" treatment was considered largely in-effective ?



See this post that I wrote after being surprised by a TV advert on that same theme, and then I had a look into the resumption of trials.

           #1,104         

I dont think they are only looking for males, but some of their adverts may be deliberately aimed at certain groups. eg the TV one I saw was put on at half time of a football game and featured a football manager.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Jan 31, 2021)

Throughout this whole pandemic, I've been listening to Laurie Garrett a lot who predicted this in the mid 90s. She hasn't got anything wrong yet and she said something in a talk I heard earlier that made me feel more depressed than I've felt in ages about our prospects.

She was comparing our approach to vaccines with the way we've misused antibiotics. Our overuse of them and not finishing courses of them over time has led to the proliferation of drug resistant bacteria. She fears the same might happen with covid because we are just vaccinating but doing so in a haphazard way. By extending the time between the first and second dose there's a possibility that we're assisting the virus in its evolutionary process of selecting for strains that evade our immune systems more effectively.  This is because one dose is only, say, 50% effective (don't know the exact figure) so virus can still get in the body, stay in the body for months, see the immune response caused by the first dose and has all that time to adjust to different strains to evade immune detection. Furthermore, this virus is apparently unusually quick to mutate and mutate significantly and, according to her if there's no real global plan, which there isn't, then this will go on and on and on.

Her comments about this are in this section. It's obviously more US centred but I think the more general points about vaccines apply everywhere. The bit about the oxford vaccine only being 8% effective is obviously wrong but this wasn't yet refuted when this talk occurred.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 1, 2021)

Had vaccination on Friday, had been feeling somewhat rough for a week or so but really hit me on Saturday. Felt a lot better yesterday and today though and am wondering whether the reaction is actually a good sign - that the vaccination has sort of taken hold and had an effect.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 1, 2021)

Some data _hints_ from the Israel Ministry of Health a few days ago indicate that they are seeing something like 23 in a million people requiring hospitalisation for COVID after vaccination (overwhelmingly BNT162b2, but a smattering of mRNA-1273) and around 443 infections per million (though this of course is not a controlled random trial, so not a clear indication of efficacy in itself). Hospitalisation rates amongst those infected would appear to be broadly similar to what one would expect prior to the vaccination.

Now there is more substantive Israeli data which _suggests_ a successful vaccination signal is starting to appear. Comparing across age cohorts and across late versus early vaccination cities and third to second lockdown one can start to tease out an effect from the vaccination programme.





Clear drops in hospitalisations (also 'severe' hospitalisations). Likewise in tests but that is more open to confounders.








More in a preprint due shortly.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 2, 2021)

An interesting though perhaps not entirely surprising observation...

A small study (DOI: 10.1101/2021.01.29.21250653) of seropositives receiving a single dose of an mRNA vaccine suggests that they develop a very strong immune response much faster than in seronegatives, with much higher (ten times) antibody titres. Reactions to the first jab are also noticeably more pronounced than in naive individuals.

A single dose mRNA regimen for the previously infected might effectively vaccinate them and save vaccine resources, though follow-up studies are needed.








						Had Covid? You May Need Only One Dose of Vaccine, Study Suggests (Published 2021)
					

People who have already been sick with Covid-19 should still be vaccinated, experts say, but they may experience intense side effects even after one dose.




					www.nytimes.com
				




e2a: A second study that comes to pretty much an identical conclusion DOI: 10.1101/2021.01.30.21250843.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 2, 2021)

__





						Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
					





					www.bloomberg.com


----------



## StoneRoad (Feb 2, 2021)

2hats said:


> An interesting though perhaps not entirely surprising observation...
> 
> A small study (DOI: 10.1101/2021.01.29.21250653) of seropositives receiving a single dose of an mRNA vaccine suggests that they develop a very strong immune response much faster than in seronegatives, with much higher (ten times) antibody titres. Reactions to the first jab are also noticeably more pronounced than in naive individuals.
> 
> ...


That seems to contradict the current protocol that has been stopping some care homes / individuals getting jabbed - the 28 days wait after testing +ve , or have I misunderstood ?


----------



## MrSki (Feb 2, 2021)

Seems the Russian vaccine is pretty good.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 2, 2021)

MrSki said:


> Seems the Russian vaccine is pretty good.



A heterologous recombinant adenovirus (rAd)-based vaccine, Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik V), showed a good safety profile and induced strong humoral and cellular immune responses in participants in phase 1/2 clinical trials. This interim analysis of the phase 3 trial of Gam-COVID-Vac showed 91·6% efficacy against COVID-19 and was well tolerated in a large cohort. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00234-8.

Note: heterologously boosted.


----------



## prunus (Feb 2, 2021)

2hats said:


> A heterologous recombinant adenovirus (rAd)-based vaccine, Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik V), showed a good safety profile and induced strong humoral and cellular immune responses in participants in phase 1/2 clinical trials. This interim analysis of the phase 3 trial of Gam-COVID-Vac showed 91·6% efficacy against COVID-19 and was well tolerated in a large cohort. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00234-8.
> 
> Note: heterologously boosted.



Yes, interesting; someone (I think it was you?) mentioned the possibility that the improved efficacy of the AZ 1/2 dose initial vaccination might be due to a lower immune response to the vector in the boost; I note that the efficacy in this heterologous adenovirus vaccine is similar to that reported for the 1/2 dose first AZ regime.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 2, 2021)

prunus said:


> Yes, interesting; someone (I think it was you?) mentioned the possibility that the improved efficacy of the AZ 1/2 dose initial vaccination might be due to a lower immune response to the vector in the boost; I note that the efficacy in this heterologous adenovirus vaccine is similar to that reported for the 1/2 dose first AZ regime.


Homologously boosted viral vector vaccines well known to suffer from such self-inflicted performance hits.

Also maybe effect not dissimilar to immune response profiles seen in single dose mRNA given to seropositives.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 2, 2021)

Lab constructed 'B.1.1.7 with E484K' pseudovirus demonstrates significantly higher immune escape from BNT162b2 derived sera.




Waiting for the preprint. Virologists are in favour of shorter time to second dose in older cohorts in particular.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 2, 2021)

New results for AZD1222 (preprint). Overall efficacy (against symptomatic COVID) 76% (CI 59-86) at 90 days (note: participants were predominately <=55 years of age), higher in half/full dose regimen. PCR testing suggests perhaps up to 54% transmission blocking might be realisable.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 2, 2021)

Oxford Covid vaccine offers 76% protection for up to 12 weeks after first dose, study shows
					

Vaccine may also reduce transmission of the virus by 67 per cent, researchers say




					www.independent.co.uk
				






> The Oxford coronavirus vaccine offers 76 per cent protection for up to 12 weeks after the administration of a first dose, new analysis suggests.
> Researchers at the University of Oxford also said their vaccine may reduce transmission of the virus by 67 per cent.
> 
> The vaccine’s effectiveness in preventing Covid-19 disease rises to 82.4 per cent once a second dose is administered after three months, according to a pre-print paper released on Tuesday.
> Oxford’s scientists said the findings, which are currently under review by _The Lancet_, supported the UK government’s decision to extend the interval between the first and second doses, having faced widespread criticism over the policy.



What 2hats said but in English


----------



## 2hats (Feb 2, 2021)

two sheds said:


> What 2hats said but in English


Not quite. Journalist should read the preprint more carefully. Transmission blocking lower in full/full dosing regimen which is how it is being administered. Also glossed over observed performance data variation with age.


----------



## prunus (Feb 2, 2021)

2hats said:


> New results for AZD1222 (preprint). Overall efficacy (against symptomatic COVID) 76% (CI 59-86) at 90 days (note: participants were predominately <=55 years of age), higher in half/full dose regimen. PCR testing suggests perhaps up to 54% transmission blocking might be realisable.



They are also saying (I think) that efficacy after the second dose is quite substantially improved by waiting 12+ weeks versus 6-weeks, which is useful support for the current 12 week plan at least for this vaccine.  Again I suppose this might be due to reduced activity against the vector after the longer gap (82.4% (62.7%, 91.7%) vs 54.9% (32.7%, 69.7%)).


----------



## 2hats (Feb 2, 2021)

prunus said:


> They are also saying (I think) that efficacy after the second dose is quite substantially improved by waiting 12+ weeks versus 6-weeks, which is useful support for the current 12 week plan at least for this vaccine.  Again I suppose this might be due to reduced activity against the vector after the longer gap (82.4% (62.7%, 91.7%) vs 54.9% (32.7%, 69.7%)).


Correct, though that was already known from the earlier trials. The good numbers noticeably in the half/full dosing regimes amongst younger cohorts.


----------



## Cloo (Feb 2, 2021)

Glad to hear it as I know that's the one my parents had - let's hope it's still OK in their age group (just over 70).


----------



## 2hats (Feb 3, 2021)

2hats said:


> Lab constructed 'B.1.1.7 with E484K' pseudovirus demonstrates significantly higher immune escape from BNT162b2 derived sera.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Preprints from this study and an allied one available from the link below.

BNT162b2 found to require a two-fold increase in serum antibody concentration to neutralise a B.1.1.7 pseudovirus compared to previous wild type variants. A ten-fold increase in serum antibody concentration was required to neutralise B.1.1.7 with E484K.

The related study found a significant number in the 80+ age cohort required both doses in order to be able to neutralise the pseudovirus.









						Pfizer BioNTech vaccine likely to be effective against B1.1.7 strain of SARS-CoV-2
					

The Pfizer BioNTech vaccine BNT162b2 is likely to be effective against the B1.1.7 variant of SARS-CoV-2, even though its efficacy is modestly affected, say




					www.cam.ac.uk


----------



## mx wcfc (Feb 3, 2021)

2hats said:


> Preprints from this study and an allied one available from the link below.
> 
> BNT162b2 found to require a two-fold increase in serum antibody concentration to neutralise a B.1.1.7 pseudovirus compared to previous wild type variants. A ten-fold increase in serum antibody concentration was required to neutralise B.1.1.7 with E484K.
> 
> ...


I used to "proof read" my daughter's science papers when she was doing her degree - checking for typos and "readability".  I never understood the actual science though.

The stuff the Urban scientists do on here is fucking brilliant. 

I'm sure.  

I don't actually understand very much of it, but I am grateful for your contributions on here.   It certainly helps.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 3, 2021)

Oxford/AstraZeneca looking to adapt AZD1222 for recent variants by about October.








						COVID-19: Vaccines against new variants should be ready by October
					

Professor Andrew Pollard, director of the Oxford vaccine group, says work on designing a new jab could be a quick process.




					news.sky.com
				



Meanwhile the Swiss regulator won't approve it due to a paucity of data.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 3, 2021)

Whether it's the Astrazeneca itself, their trial data or the different regulators, I'd say they are collectively pushing a good few people into the hesitant camp.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 3, 2021)

2hats said:


> More in a preprint due shortly.


Preprint now available. Observed profile so far consistent with at least 50% efficacy with some degree of transmission blocking (recall predominately BNT162b2 with a small contribution from mRNA-1273).








						First indication of the effect of COVID-19 vaccinations on the course of the outbreak in Israel
					

Concomitantly with rolling out its rapid COVID-19 vaccine program, Israel is experiencing its third, and so far largest, surge in morbidity. We aimed to estimate whether the high vaccine coverage among individuals aged over 60 years old creates an observable change in disease dynamics. Using...




					www.medrxiv.org
				



DOI: 10.1101/2021.02.02.21250630.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 3, 2021)

UEA analysis of Israeli infection data during the early phase of the rollout of the vaccination programme. Hypothesises that persons are perhaps dropping their guard too early after their first dose as a surge in infections is seen in the first 8 days. The vaccines are estimated to be ineffective for the first 14 days, but then reaching up to 90% effectiveness by day 21.








						Estimating the effectiveness of the Pfizer COVID-19 BNT162b2 vaccine after a single dose. A reanalysis of a study of ‘real-world’ vaccination outcomes from Israel
					

A distinctive feature of the roll out of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 virus in the UK was the decision to delay the timing of the second injection till 12 weeks after the first. The logic behind this is to protect more people sooner and so reduce the total number of severe infections...




					www.medrxiv.org
				



DOI: 10.1101/2021.02.01.21250957.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 3, 2021)

Cloo said:


> Trouble is in Israel the ultra-Orthodox have historically been treated with kid gloves and made an exception for for various things, but they need to be fucking come down on hard for this stuff.


Might be of interest.








						Extremely high SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in a strictly-Orthodox Jewish community in the UK
					

Background Ethnic and religious minorities have been disproportionately affected by SARS-CoV-2 worldwide. The UK strictly-Orthodox Jewish community has been severely affected by the pandemic. This group shares characteristics with other ethnic minorities including larger family sizes, higher...




					www.medrxiv.org
				



DOI: 10.1101/2021.02.01.21250839.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 3, 2021)

More initial analysis of the early Israeli vaccination programme data - first draft preprint. "In the past week ... there was an approximately 41% drop in number of cases, 31% drop in COVID-19 related hospitalisations and 24% drop in critically ill patients compared to 21 days ago". They too start to see the improvements around day 21 onwards. Insert usual warning about NPIs still in effect.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 3, 2021)

mx wcfc said:


> I used to "proof read" my daughter's science papers when she was doing her degree - checking for typos and "readability".  I never understood the actual science though.
> 
> The stuff the Urban scientists do on here is fucking brilliant.
> 
> ...


What the last ~24 hours of news coverage tells me is that [almost all] journalists are not capable of reading and understanding a scientific paper, particularly in the context of the underlying science.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 4, 2021)

TWiV explains why hydroxychloroquine failed in humans despite showing antiviral effects in cells,


Spoiler: thumbnail


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 4, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Whether it's the Astrazeneca itself, their trial data or the different regulators, I'd say they are collectively pushing a good few people into the hesitant camp.



Please explain? I'd personally have zero issues being vaccinated with the Oxford/AZ jab myself, but maybe you meant professionals??


----------



## Wilf (Feb 4, 2021)

William of Walworth said:


> Please explain? I'd personally have zero issues being vaccinated with the Oxford/AZ jab myself, but maybe you meant professionals??


Just that's there's been a few stories about regulators not allowing its approval for older people and/or a lack of data (Germany, also Switzerland I think) along with Macron's comments about it being less effective.  Don't get me wrong, I'll have whichever vaccine they offer me, I just get a feeling the 'noise' around Astrazeneca may end pushing a few people into the hesitant camp.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 5, 2021)

Wilf said:


> Just that's there's been a few stories about regulators not allowing its approval for older people and/or a lack of data (Germany, also Switzerland I think) along with Macron's comments about it being less effective.  Don't get me wrong, I'll have whichever vaccine they offer me, I just get a feeling the 'noise' around Astrazeneca may end pushing a few people into the hesitant camp.


Glad to see the evidence is running in favour of it being effective in the elderly:
UK regulators say extra AstraZeneca vaccine data highlights efficacy in elderly (yahoo.com)


----------



## Badgers (Feb 5, 2021)

Covid-19 plan descends into shambles as No10 changes line on vaccine plan twice
					

No10 said a release by the Cabinet Office had been released "in error" - then minutes later admitted that it had not, and was correct



					www.mirror.co.uk
				




• No 10 says phase 1 vax to be done by “end of spring”

• Cabinet office says aim to be done by start of May

• No10 says this was issued in error and is withdrawn

• It wasn’t

• No10 says not issued in error after all is government’s official position


----------



## 2hats (Feb 5, 2021)

Additional analysis for AZD1222 from an ongoing UK phase II/III trial (COV002) - preprint available here - with a focus on variants.

Participants were a mixture of recipients of half/full and full/full two dose regimens. Weekly self-administered PCR swabs were sequenced to facilitate determining efficacy with respect to variants.

Efficacy (measured at 14 days post second dose) seen against symptomatic non-B.1.1.7 disease of 84.1% (95CI: 70.7%—91.4%) compared to 74.6% (95CI: 41.6%—88.9%) efficacy against symptomatic B.1.1.7 - so a small reduction in efficacy against the new "UK"/"Kent" variant (minus E484K). For asymptomatic infection the efficacies were determined to be 75.4% (95CI: 39.9%—89.9%) for non-B.1.1.7 versus 26.5% (95CI: -112.0%—74.5%) for B.1.1.7 (note the paucity of data in the later case leading to huge confidence intervals).

So overall efficacy against the B.1.1.7 variant from all cases was *66.5%* (95CI: 37.1%—82.1%) compared to 80.7% (95CI: 69.2%—87.9%) against other variants (neutralising titres from vaccine recipients were 9-fold lower against the B.1.1.7 lineage than against an original lineage, which, not unsurprisingly, hints at a more complex relationship to immunity than direct measurement from sera).

Finally a paper that refers to cycle threshold values. The weekly swabs from the vaccinated were lower than the control group which _might_ point towards reduced transmission. Notes of caution:
(i) bear in mind poor time resolution,
(ii) self-administered sample collection,
(iii) those in the category of "non/failed sequenced swabs" had such widely varying efficacies (3% v -29%) from sequenced (75%) that there might be a not insignificant number of false-positive PCR results skewing the calculations,
(iv) the numbers of sequenced data points are fairly small and there is also still quite a significant spread in viral loads in both non-sequenced arms (vaccinated and control) of the study,

(v)  the paper didn't detail the age profile of the participants in this sub-study (only 15% of participants enrolled in the overall COV002 study are reported to be over 55).
(vi) B.1.1.7 was on the increase during the sub-study period but was not yet dominant and didn't represent the majority of cases.


----------



## Supine (Feb 5, 2021)

Early vaccine impact results from Israel. I look forward to seeing more of this kind of thing.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 5, 2021)

Supine said:


> Early vaccine impact results from Israel. I look forward to seeing more of this kind of thing.


That's the data from the paper above linked in post #1178.


----------



## Supine (Feb 5, 2021)

2hats said:


> That's the data from the paper above linked in post #1178.



Congratulations on getting in first. Graph is easier to read


----------



## 2hats (Feb 5, 2021)

Supine said:


> Congratulations on getting in first. Graph is easier to read


Same plot is in the paper. 🤷‍♂️

Meanwhile a reanalysis of incidence rates using the most recent Israel vaccination programme data (BNT162b2 dominated) suggests bounds of 66-83% effectiveness on positive cases in 60+ y.o., 76-85% for positive cases in <=60 y.o. and 87-96% reduction in severe/critical/fatal cases overall. Though, of course, that is an evolving situation - there will be delayed severe cases which haven't been counted yet.

Maybe those 1st dose curves also hint at younger cohorts becoming less cautious after the prime shot, or perhaps are just a reflection of degree of shielding tendency with increasing age.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 6, 2021)

The ZOE COVID Symptom Study team at Kings think they are seeing an effect from the first dose of BNT162b2 amongst health workers in the UK. Based on around 13000 vaccinated and roughly 33000 unvaccinated individuals reporting, they estimate that those receiving their first dose are 53% less likely to test positive for SARS-CoV-2 after 12 days. Though no details on whether those receiving their first dose were already seropositive.
DOI: 10.1038/d41586-021-00316-4.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 6, 2021)

A mention of the NISEC/Oxford COVID-19 Heterologous Prime Boost study (Com-Cov) which will look into mixing vaccine doses. It will compare four 2 dose regimens of AZD1222+AZD122, BNT162b2+BNT162b2, AZD1222+BNT162b2, BNT162b2+AZD1222 amongst around 800 volunteers in the 50+ age range. Suitable candidates can apply to take part here.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 6, 2021)

UK case curve after first dose for comparison (to Israel).




Though one wouldn't expect too much of an impact on UK cases yet (to say nothing of hospitalisations) - it's probably not going to start to manifest itself for another 2-4 weeks. Quite possibly over 80s immune systems taking longer to respond (than initial Israel over 60s data), response also _might_ not be so great in that 80+ age cohort after only one dose, and 80+ demographic perhaps generally one of the most stringent when it comes to shielding.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 6, 2021)

FT claims that a preprint on AZD1222 due out Monday will report that it doesn't offer protection against mild/moderate infections due to B.1.351. But, importantly, there were apparently no reports of hospitalisations or fatalities during the study. The study was small (just over 2000 participants, median age 31).


> The Oxford/AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine does not appear to offer protection against mild and moderate disease caused by the viral variant first identified in South Africa, according to a study due to be published on Monday. Although none of the more than 2,000 patients in the study died or was hospitalised, the findings, which have not yet been peer reviewed, could complicate the race to roll out vaccines as new strains emerge.


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 6, 2021)

Just as a contrast, Ian Sample (Guardian Science Editor) reports that Oxford/AstraZeneca could look good against the 'Kent variant', according to recent trials.


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 7, 2021)

Great interview here with Kate Bingham of the UK Vaccine Taskforce:









						Kate Bingham: Why UK strategy on Covid vaccines has been a great success
					

An exclusive interview by "Die Welt" and "La Repubblica" to the former Chair of the UK Government's Vaccine Taskforce: what Boris Johns…




					www.repubblica.it


----------



## ska invita (Feb 7, 2021)

2hats said:


> FT claims that a preprint on AZD1222 due out Monday will report that it doesn't offer protection against mild/moderate infections due to B.1.351. But, importantly, there were apparently no reports of hospitalisations or fatalities during the study. The study was small (just over 2000 participants, median age 31).


nerveracking news its seems to me.
all eyes on how much the SA mutation spreads now i guess...and how much it might spread when schools go back.#


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 7, 2021)

ska invita said:


> disastrous news its seems to me.
> all eyes on how much the SA mutation spreads now i guess...and how much it might spread when schools go back.



Why disastrous? If the vaccine protects against hospitalisations then vaccinated people can further strengthen their immunity by safely catching variants such as this one.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 7, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> Why disastrous? If the vaccine protects against hospitalisations then vaccinated people can further strengthen their immunity by safely catching variants such as this one.


ive amended disastrous to nerveracking
there isnt data on how it affects older vulnerable people as tests were"median age 31"
If vaccine " doesn't offer protection" it sounds like it doesnt offer protection

lets see what happens


----------



## Supine (Feb 7, 2021)

Prof Gilbert was on Marr this morning. Amazing  

<old link removed>


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Feb 7, 2021)

Supine said:


> Prof Gilbert was on Marr this morning. Amazing
> 
> 
> 
> ...



April last year?


----------



## prunus (Feb 7, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> Why disastrous? If the vaccine protects against hospitalisations then vaccinated people can further strengthen their immunity by safely catching variants such as this one.



The is no evidence from this study that it does protect against hospitalisations though - there were no hospitalisations in either the study or control group, so nothing to compare - also the participants were young and healthy and there were few of them, such that one wouldn’t expect to see any hospitalisations in such a cohort regardless of vaccination.  The newspapers seems to be reaching for the ‘no hospitalisations’ bit of the story rather desperately, even though it doesn’t exist in any real sense.


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 7, 2021)

Oh well I can't read the article so was just going by the headline.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 7, 2021)

Mr.Bishie said:


> April last year?



That link is last year, but Prof Gilbert was on Marr's show this morning, it's on iplayer, from around 33 minutes in.   









						BBC One - The Andrew Marr Show, 07/02/2021
					

With guests Nadhim Zahawi MP, Ed Miliband MP, Professor Sarah Gilbert and Siân Berry AM.




					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## ska invita (Feb 7, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> Oh well I can't read the article so was just going by the headline.




Oxford/AstraZeneca jab fails to prevent mild and moderate Covid from S African strain, study shows Impact on hospitalisations and deaths caused by variant not yet determined, according to preliminary findings South Africa, where the 501Y.V2 variant was first identified, has received 1m doses of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine

The Oxford/AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine does not appear to offer protection against mild and moderate disease caused by the viral variant first identified in South Africa, according to a study due to be published on Monday. Although none of the more than 2,000 mainly healthy and young patients in the study died or was hospitalised, the findings, which have not yet been peer reviewed, could complicate the race to roll out vaccines as new strains emerge.

In both the human trials and tests on the blood of those vaccinated, the jab showed significantly reduced efficacy against the 501Y.V2 viral variant, which is dominant in South Africa, according to the randomised, double-blind study seen by the Financial Times. “A two-dose regimen of [the vaccine] did not show protection against mild-moderate Covid-19 due to [the South African variant]”, the study says, adding that efficacy against severe Covid-19, hospitalisations and deaths was not yet determined.

While all Covid-19 vaccines so far have largely held up against the B.1.1.7 variant that emerged in the UK, the strain that originated in South Africa has been more worrying. Both Johnson & Johnson and Novavax have said their vaccines were less effective against the strain in clinical trials conducted in South Africa. In trials, both vaccines offered complete protection against severe disease and death in relation to Covid-19.

Moderna has said it will test a booster shot and a reformulated vaccine to target the South African variant, after studies showed its vaccine was significantly less effective. BioNTech/Pfizer said their vaccine was slightly less effective in a lab study using a pseudovirus with some mutations from the 501Y.V2 variant, but have not published results of tests against the variant itself. There are caveats to the Oxford/AstraZeneca study, as the sample sizes were relatively small. The study, led by South Africa’s University of the Witwatersrand and Oxford university, enrolled 2,026 HIV negative individuals, with a median age of 31.

Half the group was given at least one dose of placebo, with the other half receiving at least one dose of vaccine. Tulio de Oliveira, who heads the Network for Genomic Surveillance in South Africa, told the Financial Times the findings were a “wake-up call to control the virus and increase the response to Covid-19 in the world”. Health authorities worldwide hope vaccines will reduce or completely eliminate the burden of hospitalisation, which would allow for lockdowns to be eased.

While important, it is relatively less urgent to avert symptomatic, but milder, infection that does not progress to hospitalisation. Any setback for the efficacy of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine would be particularly crucial for the developing world, as the partners are producing billions of doses on a non-profit basis during the pandemic.

The vaccine still appears to be fully effective in preventing hospitalisation and death caused by other variants of coronavirus, according to data from other studies. AstraZeneca initially declined to comment. It later said it had not been able to properly ascertain the effect of the vaccine on severe disease and hospitalisation caused by the South African variant in the study given most of the participants were young, healthy adults.

“We do believe our vaccine could protect against severe disease, as neutralising antibody activity is equivalent to that of other Covid-19 vaccines that have demonstrated activity against more severe disease, particularly when the dosing interval is optimised to 8-12 weeks,” it said. It added that other immune responses, such as T-cells, may protect against disease.

Initial data, it said, indicated those responses “may remain intact” against the South African variant. It noted that it had begun to adapt the vaccine against this variant with Oxford, advancing rapidly through clinical development “so that it is ready for autumn delivery [if] needed". Oxford declined to comment on the results of the study, saying only that it was working with partners across the globe, including in South Africa, to evaluate the effects of new variants on the first generation of its Covid vaccine.

“Oxford is working with AstraZeneca to optimise the pipeline required for a strain change should one become necessary,” the university said. “This is the same issue that is faced by all of the vaccine developers, and we will continue to monitor the emergence of new variants that arise in readiness for a future strain change.”

More infectious coronavirus variants will emerge, disease expert predicts The University of the Witwatersrand did not respond to requests for comment. South Africa’s Department of Health did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The 501Y.V2 variant, dominant in South Africa, has recently been discovered in countries all over the world, including the US and the UK.

South Africa took delivery of 1m doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine last week, the first Covid-19 vaccines to arrive in the country, as part of a 1.5m dose order from India’s Serum Institute


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 7, 2021)

Sorry if this has been covered before - can we become detrimentally immune to the vector adenovirus as used in the Oxford tech ?
I'm assuming that isn't the case as the second dose builds on the first.
Or is it a case that even if we're "immune" to a virus, there will be sufficient infection and replication BEFORE the immune system catches up with it ?


----------



## prunus (Feb 7, 2021)

gentlegreen said:


> Sorry if this has been covered before - can we become immune to the vector adenovirus as used in the Oxford tech ?
> I'm assuming that isn't the case as the second dose builds on the first.
> Or is it a case that even if we're "immune" to a virus, there will be sufficient infection and replication BEFORE the immune system catches up with it ?



Yes we can, and do, 2hats has several times mentioned how heterologous (different virus vector) vectored boosting is a known improvement over homologous (same virus vector each time).  This may well be why the 1/2 dose full dose AZ regime worked better, and also why they are saying that a 12 week gap between prime and boost is better than 3 or 4 weeks.  It is also why they are starting studies on various mixed deliveries.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 7, 2021)

Coincidentally covered here :-


----------



## 2hats (Feb 7, 2021)

2hats said:


> FT claims that a preprint on AZD1222 due out Monday will report that it doesn't offer protection against mild/moderate infections due to B.1.351.


(Apparent) data dribbling in ahead of preprint. AZD1222 efficacy to moderate/mild COVID-19 due to B.1.351 at 14 days post boost 10.4% (95CI: -78.8->54.8). Neutralising titres low too. BUT note dosing interval 4 weeks instead of 12 which already suspected to provide for much better immune response.  Caution: this was a small study and had very small numbers of cases (20/714 in the placebo arm, 19/748 in the vaccine arm); the confidence intervals say it all.

Meanwhile:








						South Africa puts AstraZeneca vaccinations on hold over variant data
					

South Africa will put on hold use of AstraZeneca's COVID-19 shot in its vaccination programme, after data showed it gave minimal protection against mild-to-moderate infection caused by the country's dominant coronavirus variant.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Supine (Feb 7, 2021)

Screenshots of the AZ South Africa trial data


----------



## 2hats (Feb 7, 2021)

An early attempt to investigate any viral load changes arising from the Israeli vaccination programme (predominately BNT162b2) by analysing cycle thresholds reported by one of the country's largest COVID-19 testing laboratories. Since the vaccination status of sample providers was not known the (predominately vaccinated) 60+ cohort were compared to the (largely unvaccinated) 40-60 cohort.

There appears to be a reduction in viral load (perhaps in the range 1.6x to 20x). However note that vaccine efficacy, indeed wild type virus behaviour, may vary across age cohorts. Perhaps the viral load reduction will be more pronounced in younger cohorts, but results could be skewed by particular variants. Viral loads might be curbed due to cohabitation of many of the vaccinated. There is also no way of determining where in the infection cycle (viral load curve) each sample was taken: lone viral load measurements are not of themselves indicative of prior nor future viral shedding.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 7, 2021)

Supine said:


> Screenshots of the AZ South Africa trial data


Taken from this briefing (about 25 minutes in).


----------



## 2hats (Feb 7, 2021)

IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 detected in healthy newborn who was delivered three weeks after the mother received her first dose of mRNA-1273.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.02.03.21250579.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 7, 2021)

Interestingly, an outbreak of B.1.1.7 in a German care home setting where all residents had received their second dose of BNT162b2 by 25 January. The vaccination status of staff is not mentioned. 14 COVID positive cases recorded amongst residents and staff between 2-5 February. Note only asymptomatic or mild symptomatic cases thus far. Of course, immune response likely slower in older cohorts.




__





						Nachrichten aus Niedersachsen
					

Aktuelle Informationen und regionale Nachrichten mit Videos und Audios von NDR 1 Niedersachsen, Hallo Niedersachsen und weiterer NDR Programme.




					www.ndr.de


----------



## Hyperdark (Feb 8, 2021)

Hmm, I wonder how many years/decades before the extent of intentional infection for research purposes is revealed?


----------



## teuchter (Feb 8, 2021)

Hyperdark said:


> Hmm, I wonder how many years/decades before the extent of intentional infection for research purposes is revealed?


And the microchips.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 8, 2021)

10% effectiveness in the Oxford vaccine - grim
Particularly so for the people of South Africa

What should the government do till a new updated vaccine comes out in Autumn (hopefully)?
Allow the SA variant to spread by opening society? Or try and squash it. Its going to be #1 isnt it.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 8, 2021)

ska invita said:


> 10% effectiveness in the Oxford vaccine - grim
> Particularly so for the people of South Africa
> 
> What should the government do till a new updated vaccine comes out in Autumn (hopefully)?
> Allow the SA variant to spread by opening society? Or try and squash it. Its going to be #1 isnt it.


 I suppose it depends what 'living with it' looks like. If the vaccine does at least prevent serious cases and hospitalisation, that might be something they'd consider. But whilst I'm no virologist (to say the least) the 10% headline figure doesn't suggest it will stop serious cases. Anyway, this is still a very depressing development. 

It also reinforces the criminal stupidity of those tories who are braying to open everything up.


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 8, 2021)

2hats said:


> Interestingly, an outbreak of B.1.1.7 in a German care home setting where all residents had received their second dose of BNT162b2 by 25 January. The vaccination status of staff is not mentioned. 14 COVID positive cases recorded amongst residents and staff between 2-5 February. Note only asymptomatic or mild symptomatic cases thus far. Of course, immune response likely slower in older cohorts.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Was anyone seriously ill tho?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 8, 2021)

frogwoman said:


> Was anyone seriously ill tho?



Not so far, so hopefully they will not.



> It is unclear why the seniors got infected despite the vaccination. They may have become infected between their two vaccination appointments or within the week after the second vaccination when full protection was not yet in place. The manufacturer of the inoculated substance, Biontech / Pfizer, is also not assuming 100 percent protection, but around 95 percent. The question of whether people who have been vaccinated can still pass the infection on to other people has not yet been researched. And scientists also still have little knowledge about the British variant of the corona virus that broke out in Belm. *After all, the fact that the elderly have had mild disease so far could be due to the vaccination, said the medical officer.*


----------



## 2hats (Feb 8, 2021)

frogwoman said:


> Was anyone seriously ill tho?





2hats said:


> Interestingly, an outbreak of B.1.1.7 in a German care home setting where all residents had received their second dose of BNT162b2 by 25 January. The vaccination status of staff is not mentioned. 14 COVID positive cases recorded amongst residents and staff between 2-5 February. *Note only asymptomatic or mild symptomatic cases thus far.* Of course, immune response likely slower in older cohorts.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## elbows (Feb 8, 2021)

I wonder what approach the WHO will settle on for now. Not easy given the relative lack of data, I would err on the side of caution, but several conflicting forms of caution are involved, and which vaccines are actually available for Covax use, and when, would likely influence my decision.



> On Monday, a 15-member panel of WHO advisers were deciding on their usage recommendations for the AstraZeneca vaccine, including for older adults.
> 
> The WHO said the recommendations on who it should and should not be used for would be made public later this week.
> 
> The recommendations could impact the WHO’s vaccine strategy. That’s important, because many low-income countries are heavily reliant on a WHO-led vaccine-sharing scheme called Covax.



From 13:55 of BBC live updates page https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-55977904


----------



## IC3D (Feb 8, 2021)

Is there any increased danger of making variants more lethal in having wonky vaccines handed out in such a patchy way? Plasma therapy was singled out quickly as a possible source of the Kent strain and now its use has completely stopped interestingly Covid: 'Convalescent plasma no benefit to hospital patients'

It stands to reason a patient with a chronic infection is potentially a vector for a viral mutation party. 








						Study highlights risk of new SARS-CoV-2 mutations emerging during chronic infection
					

SARS-CoV-2 mutations similar to those in the B1.1.7 UK variant could arise in cases of chronic infection, where treatment over an extended period can provide




					www.cam.ac.uk
				




Misuse of anti-biotics gave us MRSA, resistant Gonorrhea etc so far. A haphazard vaccination program seems like we could just be poking away at a bigger bear than we have now without a reasoned plan.


----------



## elbows (Feb 8, 2021)

Well they've restarted plasma trials since then, but this time for dealing with less ill patients. I dont have links handy but I commented on that restart a few times in recent weeks, after being surprised by a NHS England TV advert appealing for donors.

Vaccination in general will in theory lead to greater selection pressure on the virus. So yes there are a number of things that could go wrong on that front. And the UKs vaccine dose timing strategy did come up in that context, including at a press conference since one of the journalists had read SAGE or NERVTAG stuff where that risk was mentioned.

I doubt it is possible to come up with any sort of vaccination strategy that is entirely free of such risks. Our approach has probably raised to stakes further, but I dont have a proper sense at this time as to whether we will get away with it or not. Keeping infections down to a very low level before, during and after vaccine rollouts is one way to reduce mutation risks generally, but we've ended up with the very opposite of that.


----------



## souljacker (Feb 8, 2021)

elbows said:


> Well they've restarted plasma trials since then, but this time for dealing with less ill patients. I dont have links handy but I commented on that restart a few times in recent weeks, after being surprised by a NHS England TV advert appealing for donors.



I did a blood test to be a plasma donor today. I got an email asking me to sign up shortly after my positive test result.


----------



## IC3D (Feb 8, 2021)

'Well they've restarted plasma trials since then, but this time for dealing with less ill patients.' Interesting move that,


souljacker said:


> I did a blood test to be a plasma donor today. I got an email asking me to sign up shortly after my positive test result.


Can you find out what they are using it for if its not hospitalised patients?


----------



## Combustible (Feb 8, 2021)

IC3D said:


> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55681051
> 
> Misuse of anti-biotics gave us MRSA, resistant Gonorrhea etc so far. A haphazard vaccination program seems like we could just be poking away at a bigger bear than we have now without a reasoned plan.


Vaccines are different to antibiotics in that they stimulate a similar immune response to that which is triggered by the virus. A partial immune response may create selection pressure for mutations which avoid the immune response, but partial immune responses will also be mounted by non vaccinated patients. Ultimately its the large number of infections worldwide which vastly increase the chances of mutations propagating.


----------



## souljacker (Feb 8, 2021)

IC3D said:


> 'Well they've restarted plasma trials since then, but this time for dealing with less ill patients.' Interesting move that,
> 
> Can you find out what they are using it for if its not hospitalised patients?



This is what the first email said:


Thank you so much for volunteering to donate convalescent plasma for use in COVID–19 treatment trials.
We need more donors like you who might be able to provide the antibody-rich plasma – known as convalescent plasma - needed for transfusion to patients with COVID–19. The antibodies could help those who are struggling to develop their own immune response - including people who may not respond to a vaccination and those vulnerable, such as cancer patients and transplant patients.
The answers you have provided so far indicate that it may be possible for you to become a plasma donor.
As a next step, we would like to invite you to complete a blood sample test to assess your antibody level. This blood sample can be done at one of our donor centres or via a convenient home test kit, which is delivered to you and then you post it back to us in a prepaid package.


----------



## IC3D (Feb 8, 2021)

Makes a lot of sense souljacker I'm glad there are specific uses for it still. Well done donating assuming you do.


----------



## Hyperdark (Feb 8, 2021)

teuchter said:


> And the microchips.



Please if you have a different view Im sure it can be expressed...please do
I take history as the best teacher in this life and history teaches that governments do this shit,  there is nothing in this world to indicate anything has changed, none have ever been proven trustworthy
Its a numbers game and any distasteful methods used to try winning it will be hidden for as long as possible, I am frequently surprised how many intelligent souls are naive enough to believe we live in more enlightened and considerate times


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 8, 2021)

Hyperdark said:


> Please if you have a different view Im sure it can be expressed...please do
> I take history as the best teacher in this life and history teaches that governments do this shit,  there is nothing in this world to indicate anything has changed, none have ever been proven trustworthy
> Its a numbers game and any distasteful methods used to try winning it will be hidden for as long as possible, I am frequently surprised how many intelligent souls are naive enough to believe we live in more enlightened and considerate times



WTF are you dribbling on about? Surely you don't actually believe the vaccines contain microchips?


----------



## souljacker (Feb 9, 2021)

Interesting article here about Cuba's vaccine efforts and how they differ from those created by private companies:









						Cuba’s COVID-19 Vaccines Serve the People, Not Profits
					

Cuba’s socialist approach to developing vaccines against COVID-19 differs strikingly from that of capitalist nations of the world. Cuba’s production of four vaccines is grounded in science and dedicated to saving the lives of all Cubans, and to international solidarity.




					www.counterpunch.org


----------



## 2hats (Feb 9, 2021)

2hats said:


> A single dose mRNA regimen for the previously infected might effectively vaccinate them


And now a third study reporting similar, indeed more promising, results.

Single dose injection with one of the mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273) reported to induce a strong immune response in persons recovering from natural SARS-CoV-2 infection. In particular a robust neutralising antibody response to B.1.351 was observed with up to 1000-fold increase in neutralising antibody titres against both B.1.351, early wild type variants and also even original SARS-CoV-1 (note: pseudoviruses used in vitro).


DOI: 10.1101/2021.02.05.21251182


----------



## 2hats (Feb 9, 2021)

Another early study of the potential for the Israel vaccination programme to reduce viral load through examining lab testing cycle thresholds over time. Viral loads observed to be reduced by perhaps up to four-fold 12-28 days post first dose. This might hint at some degree of reduction in transmission.

As with the previously mentioned study there are similar caveats, also including pre-immunisation transmission events and the undocumented sample collection location (in the respiratory tract) of the the PCR sampling process.

DOI: 10.1101/2021.02.06.21251283.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 9, 2021)

CanSino AD5-nCOV (single shot adenovirus viral vector) vaccine phase III reporting claims 65.7% efficacy in preventing symptomatic cases, and 90.98% efficacy in preventing severe disease (this is, maybe not unsurprisingly, very comparable to J&Js Janssen Ad26.COV2.S). No clear data on variants involved (no preprint yet).




__





						Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
					





					www.bloomberg.com


----------



## 2hats (Feb 9, 2021)

Another set of data points for variant neutralisation (albeit with pseudoviruses). Here BNT162b2 neutralising key mutations in B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 and P.1 (though note that not every mutation in each variant, that would be present in vivo, is being tested). Vaccine sera effective 0.81x (eg B.1.351, P.1) to 1.46x (eg B.1.1.7) relative to original wild type.

DOI: 10.1038/s41591-021-01270-4.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 9, 2021)

Vaxart has announced mixed but potentially promising data from the phase I trials of their VXA-CoV2-1 oral COVID-19 tablet vaccine (Ad5 adenovirus vector based). The vaccine induces immune responses to both spike and nucleocapsid proteins. A small study where some recipients received one dose and others two doses 29 days apart.

It was well tolerated, no severe, only mild GI events. Strong CD8+ T-cell responses to the spike protein were seen along with good IgA responses in both nasal mucosa and serum around 2 months. Unfortunately no IgG response seen.

This may hold promise for targeting new variants and reducing transmission. The company hopes to embark on Phase II studies, including early efficacy estimates, in the coming months.








						Vaxart Announces Positive Preliminary Data from Phase 1 Clinical Trial Evaluating Its Oral COVID-19 Tablet Vaccine Candidate
					

Study reached primary and secondary endpoints of safety and immunogenicity, respectivelyVXA-CoV2-1 induced potent CD8+ T-cell responsesVXA-CoV2-1...




					www.globenewswire.com
				



Notes: They have previously taken this approach to developing an influenza H1N1 vaccine VXA-A1.1 DOI: 10.1016/s1473-3099(19)30584-5. There are concerns about the use of Ad5 as a vaccine vector DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32156-5.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 10, 2021)

Next stupid question 

Will they be able to combine covid vaccine with flu vaccine if in one vaccination if we're going to need annual shots?

I presume would for example mean they need similar storage conditions before vaccination


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Feb 10, 2021)

Asthma drug may reduce risk of severe Covid if taken early – study
					

Inhaled budesonide could become first treatment in early stages of infection if study confirmed




					www.theguardian.com
				




Sounds promising on the treatment side.


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 11, 2021)

Balanced article (IMO) by Sarah Boseley (Guardian Health editor) about the ups and downs of the  Oxford/AstraZeneca's vaccine's reputation.




			
				Guardian headline said:
			
		

> *A series of knocks : Oxford/AstraZeneca's bumpy road to Covid vaccine confidence*
> *From doubts about efficacy in older people to questions about variants, scientists have faced a battle to convince the public and regulators*






			
				Sarah Boseley said:
			
		

> The latest blow to the vaccine’s public image has been the small trial in just over 2,000 people under age 40 in South Africa. It found “minimal protection” – later said to be 10% – against mild to moderate disease caused by the variant. South Africa announced it was pausing its rollout of the vaccine and will give it to 100,000 people step by step, watching to see if anyone ends up in hospital.



and :



> No one was severely ill, hospitalised or died, but the worry is that these were younger people, so less likely to get seriously ill. Oxford/AstraZeneca point to all the trial data showing that nobody has been seriously ill after getting their vaccine (or any of the others) and experts believe the protection is still there against the variant. Once more, however, confidence in the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine is likely to take a knock, whether or not it is justified


----------



## 2hats (Feb 12, 2021)

Another preprint looking at B and T cell responses to BNT162b2 and comparing with naturally acquired immunity. Here, antibody response after a single dose was significantly degraded against recent variants,  B.1.1.7 to a lesser degree and B.1.351 markedly, compared to earlier wild type, but T cell response was still significant. Naturally acquired immune antibody response against new variants was similarly poor. Antibody neutralisation improved after the boost dose. Also, after two doses a significant increase in the binding antibodies to both SARS-CoV-1 and MERS was also measured.

Yet again hints that with infection by recent variants mild-moderate infections might be seen more commonly in the fully vaccinated with implications for transmission. Underlines the importance of the boost dose. Also highlights role of T cells, responding to a wider range of epitopes than the antibodies (which are more RBD focussed), so they are better able to respond to new variants.
DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-226857/v1.


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 12, 2021)

A case of the virus seen mutating in a patient with a compromised immune system:

"During the patient’s stay, 23 viral samples were available for analysis, the majority from his nose and throat. Between days 66 and 82, following the first two administrations of plasma, the team saw a dramatic shift in the virus population, with the mutated virus becoming dominant. Although this variant initially appeared to die away, it re-emerged again when the third course of remdesivir and convalescent plasma therapy were administered.

Professor Ravi Gupta from the Cambridge Institute of Therapeutic Immunology and Infectious Disease, who led the research, said: “What we were seeing was essentially a competition between different variants of the virus, and we think it was driven by the convalescent plasma therapy. “The [mutated] virus that eventually won out...initially gained the upper hand during convalescent plasma therapy before being overtaken by other strains, but re-emerged when the therapy was resumed. One of the mutations is in the new UK variant, though there is no suggestion that our patient was where they first arose.”

He added: “Given that both vaccines and therapeutics are aimed at the spike protein, which we saw mutate in our patient, our study raises the worrying possibility that the virus could mutate to outwit our vaccines. This effect is unlikely to occur in patients with functioning immune systems, where viral diversity is likely to be lower due to better immune control. But it highlights the care we need to take when treating immunocompromised patients, where prolonged viral replication can occur, giving greater opportunity for the virus to mutate.”"









						Coronavirus more likely to mutate into Kent strain in chronic infections
					

The Cambridge University scientists were the first to observe a Kent strain-like mutation happen in real time




					www.cambridge-news.co.uk


----------



## Sunray (Feb 13, 2021)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Asthma drug may reduce risk of severe Covid if taken early – study
> 
> 
> Inhaled budesonide could become first treatment in early stages of infection if study confirmed
> ...



This is very interesting, with my sample size of one, I didn't have any breathing problems when I got COVID. Crazy cough but breathing clear as normal. I was and still do take the above-mentioned preventer. 

Inhaled steroids, unlike dexamethasone which impacts your immune system, are totally safe, well understood and cheap. If they slash hospital admission would be one of the 1st real wins of this pandemic.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 13, 2021)

I'm a tad confused because I'd thought the brown inhaler contained beclometasone rather than budesonide.


----------



## Sunray (Feb 13, 2021)

two sheds said:


> I'm a tad confused because I'd thought the brown inhaler contained beclometasone rather than budesonide.



It does but they are similar drugs

From the beclometasone  wiki " Beclometasone is mainly a glucocorticoid.[1] "
From the budesonide wiki " Budesonide is mainly acting as a glucocorticoid.[1] "

and of course, they have to test each one individually.  Both are safe and cheap. 
Giving people oral steroids when really sick comes across as a bit of a gamble, on the one hand, preventing ARDS and on the other increasing the time they are sick.  

I can hope it prevents people from getting that sick.


----------



## Badgers (Feb 14, 2021)

First I have heard of this 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/01/...itain.html#click=[URL]https://t.co/VSw1YhBvax[/URL]



> Amid a sputtering vaccine rollout and fears of a new and potentially more transmissible variant of the coronavirus, Britain has quietly updated its vaccination playbook to allow for a mix-and-match vaccine regimen. If a second dose of the vaccine a patient originally received isn’t available, or if the manufacturer of the first shot isn’t known, another vaccine may be substituted, health officials said.


----------



## LDC (Feb 14, 2021)

It's been mentioned before, it's not for routine use, it's for limited situations when clinical need of the patient over rides concerns about mixing vaccines. That article is scare mongering and bad reporting tbh.


----------



## prunus (Feb 14, 2021)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> It's been mentioned before, it's not for routine use, it's for limited situations when clinical need of the patient over rides concerns about mixing vaccines. That article is scare mongering and bad reporting tbh.



There are reasonable theoretical reasons why boosting with a different vaccine (from the current pool of largely similarly targeted vaccines) might in fact be more efficacious than same-vaccine boosting - obviously this will need to be tested (and is being tested at the moment I believe), but any kind of ‘OMG this is crazy risky what are they doing’ reporting is way off the mark, in my opinion.


----------



## LDC (Feb 14, 2021)

prunus said:


> There are reasonable theoretical reasons why boosting with a different vaccine (from the current pool of largely similarly targeted vaccines) might in fact be more efficacious than same-vaccine boosting - obviously this will need to be tested (and is being tested at the moment I believe), but any kind of ‘OMG this is crazy risky what are they doing’ reporting is way off the mark, in my opinion.



bellaozzydog is taking one for the team and undertaking a one person U75 mixing vaccine trial.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 14, 2021)

Here's an interesting suggestion from France.



> France's top health authority has recommended that people who've had coronavirus only get one vaccine dose.
> 
> Those who have recovered from the virus have built an immune response similar to that brought on by a vaccine, said the High Authority of Health (HAS).
> 
> ...











						COVID-19: Previously-infected people only need one vaccine shot, say French experts
					

A small study recently found that previously-infected people had 10 to 20 times higher antibody levels after a first vaccine shot.




					news.sky.com


----------



## 2hats (Feb 15, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> Here's an interesting suggestion from France.


Three studies mentioned upthread (#1157, #1232) and here another study which in part touches upon that...

Here for the first time (to my knowledge) a preprint for a small study (two lots of ~30 individuals, one of ~20) testing vaccine mediated and recovered patient sera against an earlier B.1 clade (D614G type), B.1.1.7 (aka "Kent"/"UK") and B.1.351 ("South African") variants using real viral isolates (as oppose to laboratory constructed pseudoviruses or just selected antibodies).

In convalescents strong immune responses were seen to D614G and B.1.1.7 at months 3 and 6. Degree of neutralising activity depended on the severity of original infection, as has been observed in other studies. A noticeable reduction (5-10x) in neutralisation titres at both time points was seen with respect to B.1.351. In a separate group sampled at month 9 all titres were significantly lower still but particularly so against B.1.351. The fraction of persons producing neutralising antibodies also dropped off and markedly so for B.1.351.


The studies were repeated with BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine mediated sera and also nasal swabs taken at weeks 2 and 3 post first dose and week 4 (1 week post second dose). D614G started to be neutralised at week 2, but it took till week 3 to see any response to B.1.1.7 (and then less than D614G). By week 4 both were similarly neutralised, and only then was a response to B.1.351 seen (ie after the booster shot) albeit at a lower level than for the other two variants.


In the nasal mucosal samples no antiviral effect was seen at weeks 2 or 3 in vaccine recipients. However, in a very small number of cases, who were determined to be seropositive at vaccination (had naturally acquired immunity due to earlier infection), very high titres were seen by week 2, capable of neutralising D614G and B.1.1.7 but inactive to B.1.351.

These results underline the importance of the second (booster dose), where posology indicates, though a strong response to the first (prime) dose was seen in seropositives (as at least three previous studies have observed). They also highlight the challenge posed by B.1.351 (and likely other E484K featuring variants) to both vaccines and reinfection, and the poor mucosal (upper respiratory tract) response suggests that a degree of transmission and asymptomatic/mild/moderate infection is quite possible but without the severe disease associated with progression of the infection to the lower respiratory tract.

(Note: small study numbers, vaccinated participants age range 46-63 years, no T-cell response analysis.)
DOI: 10.1101/2021.02.12.430472.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 15, 2021)

Data from one of Israel's main health service organisations for ~600k unvaccinated and ~600k BNT162b2 fully vaccinated (two doses) may suggest that that vaccine is about 94% effective in preventing symptomatic infection and 92% in preventing serious illness, in all age groups (16+ though over 70s could not be fully assessed). Data indicated high vaccine efficacy over a period of seven days or more after the second dose. Effectiveness against a serious illness a week after the second dose appeared to range from 91% to 99%.

Note however that extensive NPIs were in place throughout this study period. Also worth bearing in mind that the predominate variant in Israel right now is B.1.1.7. Preprint due shortly.








						מחקר ענק של כללית: יעילות החיסון במניעת מחלה - 94%
					

המחקר הגדול ביותר על החיסונים עד כה: מניתוח נתונים של 1.2 מיליון מבוטחי כללית, שמחציתם חוסנו, עולה כי בקרב המתחסנים נרשמה גם ירידה של 92% במניעת מחלה קשה. פרופ' בליצר: "חד-משמעית - החיסון יעיל ביותר בחיים האמיתיים, בדיוק כפי שנמצא במחקר המקורי". יותר מ-2.5 מיליון כבר התחסנו בשתי מנות. שיעור...




					www.ynet.co.il
				




A second healthcare provider reports 544 cases, 15 requiring hospitalisation, 4 severe, no deaths, from 523k fully vaccinated (two doses of BNT162b2). This is reported as a 93% effectiveness rate. Note that NPIs were and are still in effect.








						It works: 0 deaths, only 4 severe cases among 523,000 fully vaccinated Israelis
					

HMO data a week after 2nd dose shows 93% effectiveness, ‘unequivocally' proving vaccine's success and leaving ‘no doubt’ it’s saved many Israeli lives, says Maccabi official




					www.timesofisrael.com


----------



## 2hats (Feb 15, 2021)

This study (600 participants) indicates that mRNA-1273 vaccine doses at both 50μg and 100μg appear to elicit similarly robust immune responses in younger (18-55 yr) and older (≥55 yr) adults. It may be possible to half dosing each time and thereby immediately double the inventory. T cell responses still need to be profiled.





DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.02.007.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 15, 2021)

A bumper set of studies (not yet peer reviewed) into the effectiveness of vaccine sera with respect to various variants of concern. All tell a similar story.

Here early measurements for P.1 and P.2, as well as B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 (plus a few other) performed with BNT162b2 (and with fewer participants, mRNA-1273) vaccine sera on lentivirus based pseudoviruses. B.1.1.7 ("UK"/"Kent"), B.1.1.298 ("Danish" 'mink') and B.1.1.298 ("Californian") all neutralised to a similar degree to earlier wild types (though the 'mink' variant has a small degree of resistance). P.1/P.2 ("Brazilian") variants noticeably more resilient whilst a significant reduction in neutralisation is seen with B.1.351. Just waiting for the preprint to drop (e2a: preprint now available).











A second study along similar lines, here using a vesicular stomatitis pseudovirus (exhibits similar dynamics to SARS-CoV-2 with respect to ACE2 and TMPRSS2) and BNT162b2 vaccine sera. "Our results await confirmation with authentic SARS-CoV-2. However, the data available at present suggest that the South Africa and Brazil variants constitute an elevated threat to human health and that containment of these variants by non-pharmaceutic interventions is an important task". Earlier D614G wild type, B.1.1.7, B.1.351 and P.1 are compared, with ever decreasing neutralisation seen between B.1.1.7 v P.1 v B.1.351 in both convalescent and vaccine sera.

DOI: 10.1101/2021.02.11.430787.

Finally, a third study focussed on B.1.1.7 with/without E484K (another pseudovirus to mimic the behaviour currently being observed in some regions of the UK) versus the performance of BNT162b2 mediated sera and convalescent sera. Again B.1.1.7 reduces the effectiveness of neutralisation, but B.1.1.7 with a E484K mutation noticeably reduces the neutralisation ability of both sera. The need for a second dose to maximise immune antibody response is underlined. Here the 'fold change' of titres required to achieve the same outcome is plotted (essentially read inverted compared to the previous two plots).

DOI: 10.1101/2021.01.19.21249840.
An investigation of vaccine mediated T-cell immunity compared to that naturally acquired appears warranted. In particular as most leading vaccines currently focus on the spike proteins and it is quite likely that convalescent T-cell immunity is also gained from the nucleocapsid and perhaps membrane proteins too.


----------



## Badgers (Feb 20, 2021)

Single-dose administration and the influence of the timing of the booster dose on immunogenicity and efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine: a pooled analysis of four randomised trials
					

The results of this primary analysis of two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 were consistent with those seen in the interim analysis of the trials and confirm that the vaccine is efficacious, with results varying by dose interval in exploratory analyses. A 3-month dose interval might have advantages...



					www.thelancet.com


----------



## elbows (Feb 22, 2021)

Good news in this study, although it is worth paying attention to the caveats.









						Covid vaccines - 'spectacular' impact on serious illness
					

First evidence from the UK's vaccine programme shows a reduction in hospital admissions in Scotland.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## 2hats (Feb 22, 2021)

elbows said:


> Good news in this study, although it is worth paying attention to the caveats.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Preprint here. A prospective cohort study of 1,137,775 first dose recipients. Caution: they _estimated_ vaccine effects against COVID-19 related hospital admission. Other outcomes (A&E/ICU admission and deaths) were not considered. The cohort was somewhat stratified with respect to age by vaccine type (proportionally higher AZD1222(ChAdOx1) uptake in 80+, higher BNT162b2 uptake in under 65s).




> _Findings:_ The first dose of the *BNT162b2* vaccine was associated with a vaccine effect of *85% (95%CI 76 to 91)* for COVID-19 related hospitalisation at 28-34 days post-vaccination. Vaccine effect at the same time interval for the *ChAdOx1* vaccine was *94% (95%CI 73 to 99)*. Results of combined vaccine effect for prevention of COVID-19 related hospitalisation were comparable when restricting the analysis to those aged *≥80 years *(*81%; 95%CI 65 to 90* at 28-34 days post-vaccination).
> 
> _Interpretation:_ A single dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA and ChAdOx1 vaccines resulted in substantial reductions in the risk of COVID-19 related hospitalisation in Scotland.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 23, 2021)

elbows said:


> Good news in this study, although it is worth paying attention to the caveats.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Good news certainly, though the piece could have been clearer. Were they discounting hospitalisations that occurred_ less than_ 4 after vaccination - I'm guessing they were. Also, I'm not sure how the study ran up to 15 Feb, as many of those vaccinations wouldn't yet be up to 4 weeks.  But good news is good news and anything like this kicks back at the anti-vaxx twats.



> The preliminary data from the EAVE II project covers 1.14 million vaccinations given in Scotland between 8 December and 15 February.
> The study looked at the numbers being admitted to hospital with Covid among this population and compared it to those admitted who were not vaccinated.
> In total, there were just over 8,000 people who ended up in hospital, but only 58 were among the vaccinated group after the four-week mark.


----------



## souljacker (Feb 24, 2021)

My antibody blood test for the Convalescent Plasma Donor Eligibility Test came back today and I scored 98.4 U/mL. Anyone know what that means? They want my blood though so I'll book an appointment. I'd be interested to know if that is considered a low or high amount though. I was hardly affected by the disease so I was expecting a low result.


----------



## Supine (Feb 24, 2021)

souljacker said:


> My antibody blood test for the Convalescent Plasma Donor Eligibility Test came back today and I scored 98.4 U/mL. Anyone know what that means? They want my blood though so I'll book an appointment. I'd be interested to know if that is considered a low or high amount though. I was hardly affected by the disease so I was expecting a low result.



I don't know about the value but I know there is a shortage of plasma in the supply chain. So good work on donating


----------



## 2hats (Feb 28, 2021)

Yet two more studies looking at immune responses after one dose (here both BNT162b2) in seropositives, compared to seronegatives.

The first study, amongst (51) healthcare workers, found that previously infected individuals exhibited a neutralising response to the spike (at 21-29 days post dose) of up to two orders of magnitude greater than the uninfected (who after one dose exhibited a response similar to that of the previously infected prior to their first dose).




DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00501-8.

The second study, again of (72) healthcare workers, likewise found a huge immune response to a first dose amongst seropositives (samples taken just prior to first dose and then 21-25 days later). This was seen in both antibody and T-cell responses. Notably, a poor response to first dose amongst older (>50 years) seronegatives was seen (a correlation not seen in seropositives). Previously uninfected also exhibited a poor T-cell response to first dose across all ages, half of them with barely any response at all. This highlights the importance of a timely second dose for the previously uninfected, in particular ages 50+, and the need for them to continue NPIs.




DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00502-X.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 28, 2021)

J&J/Janssen AD26.CoV2.S, a single dose viral vector vaccine, has been approved by the US FDA. (Can be stored at 2-8C for up to 3 months.)








						U.S. authorizes J&J's COVID-19 vaccine, making it third available
					

The U.S. government on Saturday authorized Johnson & Johnson's single-dose COVID-19 vaccine, enabling millions more Americans to be vaccinated in the coming weeks and setting the vaccine up for additional approvals around the world.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Supine (Mar 2, 2021)

Good news. The J&J vaccine effect improves over time. The bad news - the results look like a penis.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 2, 2021)

Why the dip at the end?


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Mar 2, 2021)

teuchter said:


> Why the dip at the end?


There's often a drip at the end.


----------



## LDC (Mar 2, 2021)

teuchter said:


> Why the dip at the end?



Explains it underneath.


----------



## prunus (Mar 2, 2021)

teuchter said:


> Why the dip at the end?



It’s explained in the legend. Too few data points with that duration to make confident predictions.


----------



## 2hats (Mar 2, 2021)

teuchter said:


> Why the dip at the end?


Lack of data returns. Consider how few participants there are by then. The correct statement is that efficacy improves up to 56 days and then beyond that confidence is currently poor.

e2a: The FDA vaccine EUA packages are very thorough, provide a lot of answers that are otherwise missing from the public domain and leave one in little doubt where the remaining question marks are. It's a shame one for AZD1222 hasn't been submitted yet.


----------



## 2hats (Mar 3, 2021)

Here a study into vaccine effectivity specifically against the P.1 variant. A (VSV) pseudovirus was constructed which featured all 10 point mutations found in the P.1 variant. The neutralising effect of several monoclonal antibodies, convalescent plasma and both BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 mediated sera (from 22 donors, variously collected a week or more after the second dose where manufacturer posology had been followed) was tested against this. Convalescent plasma was found to be almost seven times less effective against P.1 than earlier wild type SARS-CoV-2. mRNA vaccine sera were found to be 2-3x less effective against P.1 than earlier wild type (BNT162b2 having a slight edge). These results are consistent with the P.1 related findings of the (first) two studies reported previously in post #1253.

DOI: 10.1101/2021.03.01.433466.

By way of comparison, reduction in effectiveness of vaccine sera against B.1.351 was, using the same approach (by the same team), previously found to be around 7-9 fold for both mRNA vaccine sera (again, BNT162b2 yielding the least ground), though note that this was observed to be a 10-13 fold reduction in assays with authentic virus.

DOI: 10.1101/2021.01.25.428137.

These studies clearly highlight the additional degrees of immune escape that B.1.351 has over P.1 (and both have over B.1.1.7 and earlier wild type).


----------



## weltweit (Mar 3, 2021)

2hats I don't understand these charts, what am I looking at / for? 

Don't worry if it is too complicated to explain but I bet I am not the only one who doesn't understand them.


----------



## 2hats (Mar 3, 2021)

Reductions in efficacy of the intervention: variously selected antibodies, convalescent sera (ie the previously infected), vaccine sera (from vaccinated persons) under consideration. This is usually expressed as either how many more multiples of each is required to reach the same level of neutralisation of the virus, or as factors of dilution to achieve the same or as some relative measure of the level of various antibodies - it varies with the study. Essentially one is just looking at the factor (sometimes orders of magnitude - note log scales) of effectiveness comparing how whatever it is that is being tested performs relative to the action of the same against an earlier variant. From above - see the relative drop in 'performance' (follow the green arrows) of Moderna (left), Pfizer (right) vaccines (technically the vaccine mediated sera retrieved from vaccinated persons) against B.1.1.7 ('UK/Kent' variant) and B.1.351 ('SA' variant) compared to an earlier variant (the main variant with the D614G mutation was that that dominated cases over summer last year across Europe) - though in this particular case this isn't the 'real' virus variant of each but an artificial copy of each constructed in the lab (the upper panels of the original figure illustrate that the performance against 'real world' virus is reduced yet further still) .


----------



## weltweit (Mar 3, 2021)

2hats thanks for that explanation. I am starting from a low level of understanding, I don't even know what the Y axis represents. I see that the plots in pink on the left don't align well with the plots in black in the middle and even less well with the plots in orange on the right. Is it as simple as that, they don't align therefore they don't have effect? 

And is there a reason they haven't tested the Oxford AZ also?


----------



## 2hats (Mar 3, 2021)

weltweit said:


> I don't even know what the Y axis represents.


1/(amount required to neutralise the [pseudo]virus).


> I see that the plots in pink on the left don't align well with the plots in black in the middle and even less well with the plots in orange on the right.


Not align but maps to.


> Is it as simple as that, they don't align therefore they don't have effect?


No. That more of each (= lower on plot) is required to achieve the same degree of neutralisation of the [pseudo]virus.


> And is there a reason they haven't tested the Oxford AZ also?


Because it doesn't have [emergency] regulatory approval where they are ie the US (so pick one or more of: there is no one conveniently available to collect sera from, or it is harder to collect such, or of little immediate interest to them).


----------



## 2hats (Mar 4, 2021)

Moderna have prepared and shipped re-engineered booster vaccines, mRNA-1273.351, for phase I trials against B.1.351, along with a multivalent, mRNA-1273.211, which combines the original and B.1.351 targeted vaccines.








						Moderna Announces it has Shipped Variant-Specific Vaccine Candidate, mRNA-1273.351, to NIH for Clinical Study
					

Moderna, Inc. (Nasdaq: MRNA), a biotechnology company pioneering messenger RNA (mRNA) therapeutics and vaccines, announces that it has completed manuf



					www.businesswire.com
				




Novavax have also tweaked NVX-CoV2373 for new variants and are completing animal trials with it. They plan to submit a package for their original vaccine to gain UK MHRA approval later this month.


----------



## 2hats (Mar 4, 2021)

And yet again, at least the eighth study (I think I have counted) indicating a strong immune response in previously infected individuals ('Asymptomatic' and 'Symptomatic' US healthcare workers) after a single vaccine dose. Here such recipients of mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273) exhibited very strong IgG antibody (left) and live virus neutralisation responses (right), initially beginning to peak 1 week after the single dose and much stronger than seronegatives' responses ('Ab negative') by two weeks.





DOI: 10.1001/jama.2021.3341.


----------



## 2hats (Mar 4, 2021)

weltweit said:


> I don't understand these charts, what am I looking at / for?


This short tweet thread (particularly 2-5/10) _might_ help clarify it further.


----------



## 2hats (Mar 4, 2021)

A study of cross-reactivity between variants (using earlier types, B.1.1.7, B.1.351, all live virus) found that, whilst antibodies can be high, cross-neutralisation is poor. This suggests that multivalent vaccines would be the appropriate approach.







DOI: 10.1101/2021.03.01.433314.


----------



## 2hats (Mar 4, 2021)

Indian vaccine manufacturer Bharat Biotech's COVAXIN (inactivated whole virus, two dose regime, 28 days apart, storage at 2-8C) reported as having 80.6% efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19, two weeks after the second dose, in phase III trials (25800 participants, 18-98 years of age). This trial ran from late November to present, during the latter period of which it appears B.1.1.7 has become largely dominant (though data is sparse) on a background of earlier 19A/B clades and D614G.


----------



## 2hats (Mar 8, 2021)

The studies on seropositives and dosing keep rolling in. Here a small study comparing SARS-CoV-2 naive and recovered, again illustrating the swift, strong jump in response of both antibodies and memory B cells in seropositives after a single dose (and little change after the second dose). Separately they note a (not unexpected) suggestion of poorer memory B cell response with advancing age. 

 
DOI: 10.1101/2021.03.03.21252872.


----------



## Hyperdark (Mar 8, 2021)

So having strong immune response symptoms after the jab has a possible link to having previous infection?


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 8, 2021)

But a strong reaction to the jab after a totally asymptomatic previous infection ?


----------



## 2hats (Mar 11, 2021)

Updated report on a previously highlighted study, confirming the significant and rapid response in seropositives after one mRNA dose and side effects at greater frequencies than seronegatives.




DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc2101667.

And again (the tenth study, I think now, coming to a similar conclusion) - seropositives large immune response after a single dose of BNT162b2 - a study of 642 Spanish healthcare workers. Relative IgG responses to spike at 3 weeks after first dose for seronegatives and variously classified seropositives (the more severe the episode of COVID-19, the greater the response):

DOI: 10.1101/2021.03.08.21253065.

Study number 11 - here 22 participants - looking at T and B cell responses, IgG, IgM and neutralising antibodies titres in seropositives after a single dose of BNT162b2. You can, by now, guess the outcome.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.03.05.21252590.


----------



## 2hats (Mar 11, 2021)

Similar to an earlier study focussed on mRNA-1273 dosing, here BNT162b2 also found to be effective at lower doses in adults aged 19-55. A two dose 10μg regimen elicits a comparable response to the standard 30 μg dose for binding antibodies, viral neutralisation, cytokine profiles, and CD4, CD8 expansion. Similarly, a single dose 10μg regimen or a two dose 1μg regimen equals or exceeds the immunogenicity of a single 30 μg dose. Obvious implications for vaccine supply, logistics, costs, potentially side effects.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.03.06.21253058.


----------



## 2hats (Mar 11, 2021)

EMA recommends granting J&J/Janssen single dose Ad26.COV2.S a conditional marketing authorisation.





						EMA recommends COVID-19 Vaccine Janssen for authorisation in the EU - European Medicines Agency
					

EMA recommends COVID-19 Vaccine Janssen for authorisation in the EU




					www.ema.europa.eu


----------



## 2hats (Mar 11, 2021)

2hats said:


> Moderna have prepared and shipped re-engineered booster vaccines, mRNA-1273.351, for phase I trials against B.1.351, along with a multivalent, mRNA-1273.211, which combines the original and B.1.351 targeted vaccines.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Amendment to phase II trials have now begun (booster study for previous recipients), separate phase I trails to commence shortly.





						Moderna Announces First Participants Dosed in Study Evaluating COVID-19 Booster Vaccine Candidates | Moderna, Inc.
					

Study to enroll 60 participants previously vaccinated with mRNA-1273 in Phase 2, to evaluate booster vaccine candidates against the B.1.351 variant first identified in South Africa CAMBRIDGE, Mass. --(BUSINESS WIRE)--Mar. 10, 2021-- Moderna, Inc. (Nasdaq: MRNA), a biotechnology company pioneering




					investors.modernatx.com


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 11, 2021)

2hats said:


> Updated report on a previously highlighted study, confirming the significant and rapid response in seropositives after one mRNA dose and side effects at greater frequencies than seronegatives.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Blimey.
I suppose I could have caught it during my 16 weeks at work between June and October - I have to say I was distinctly disturbed that masks weren't mandated till very late ...


----------



## two sheds (Mar 11, 2021)

Does this mean you won't need the second jab? Although difficult to know whether you did actually have the virus itself.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 11, 2021)

two sheds said:


> Does this mean you won't need the second jab? Although difficult to know whether you did actually have the virus itself.


well if I did have it, it was like no other virus I ever had - they consistently put me on my back for several days ...


----------



## 2hats (Mar 11, 2021)

On age-dependent immune response to vaccination and in particular the importance of second dose and timing thereof...
179 volunteers serological analysis 17-19 days after first dose of BNT162b2 and 17 days after second dose. Seropositives screened (by identifying nucleocapsid specific antibodies). Clear illustration of immunosenescence.

DOI: 10.1101/2021.03.03.21251066.

Particularly important in the light of UK dosing schedules (especially mRNA based vaccines) and the shift in risk of vaccine escape (see, for example, DOI: 10.1126/science.abg8663). Notably where one has a partially vaccinated 'part immune' elderly cohort along with a large, more mobile, younger cohort; a potential issue highlighted in this fairly simple mathematical modelling from the Joint UNIversities Pandemic and Epidemiological Research consortium, which is the basis of this New Scientist article:








						Giving vaccine to older people first could help the coronavirus evolve
					

The strategy of vaccinating the eldest first may save the most lives in the short term, but also has the greatest risk of creating variants that escape vaccine immunity




					www.newscientist.com


----------



## 2hats (Mar 11, 2021)

New Pfizer press release, summarising their analysis of results thus far from real world use of BNT162b2 in Israel. They claim 97% efficacy against symptomatic and severe COVID-19, and death. Additionally, they claim 94% efficacy against asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections. Both measured at two weeks after the second dose, as per manufacturer's standard dosing interval.





						Real-World Evidence Confirms High Effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine and Profound Public Health Impact of Vaccination One Year After Pandemic Declared | Pfizer
					

Dramatically lower COVID-19 disease incidence rates observed in individuals fully vaccinated with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, based on real-world data gathered by the Israel Ministry of Health Data suggest Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine prevents asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection Latest data analysis...




					www.pfizer.com


----------



## 2hats (Mar 11, 2021)

Results of Novavax phase III UK trial (15,000 adults 18-84 years of age, including 27% over age 65) just beginning to surface. NVX-CoV2373 (two dose protein sub-unit) 100% effective against severe disease, hospitalisation and death. 96.4% effective against original SARS-CoV-2 virus and 86.3% effective against B.1.1.7.





						Novavax Confirms High Levels of Efficacy Against Original and Variant COVID-19 Strains in United Kingdom and South Africa Trials | Novavax Inc. - IR Site
					






					ir.novavax.com


----------



## 2hats (Mar 15, 2021)

Moderna have commenced trials of their next COVID-19 vaccine, mRNA-1283, which can potentially be shipped and stored at standard refrigerator temperatures. This is a phase I study evaluating doses at 10 µg, 30 µg, and 100 µg, as a 2-dose series, 28 days apart, and a single dose at 100 µg to compare with the current, approved, two dose regimen of 100 µg of mRNA-1273.




__





						First Participants Dosed in Phase 1 Study Evaluating mRNA-1283, Moderna’s Next Generation COVID-19 Vaccine | Moderna, Inc.
					

mRNA-1283 is being developed as a potential refrigerator stable mRNA vaccine that will facilitate easier distribution and administration by healthcare providers CAMBRIDGE, Mass. --(BUSINESS WIRE)--Mar. 15, 2021-- Moderna, Inc. (Nasdaq: MRNA), a biotechnology company pioneering messenger RNA (mRNA)




					investors.modernatx.com


----------



## 2hats (Mar 18, 2021)

Fake Sputnik V seized in Mexico, apparently destined for Honduras.








						Fake batch of Sputnik V vaccine seized in Mexico, Russian wealth fund says
					

Authorities in Mexico have seized a batch of fake doses of Russia's Sputnik V vaccine, the Russian Direct Investment Fund, which is responsible for exports of the COVID-19 vaccine, said on Thursday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Mar 19, 2021)

Phase III trial of Medicago/GSK CovLP adjuvanted COVID-19 vaccine (2 dose regimen) about to commence. CoVLP is a (nicotine) plant-derived vaccine candidate using Coronavirus-Like-Particle technology featuring the recombinant spike glycoprotein.








						Media | Medicago
					

Welcome to Medicago’s Media Room, where you can find our latest news, key facts, figures and background information.




					www.medicago.com


----------



## 8ball (Mar 19, 2021)

2hats said:


> Moderna have commenced trials of their next COVID-19 vaccine, mRNA-1283, which can potentially be shipped and stored at standard refrigerator temperatures. This is a phase I study evaluating doses at 10 µg, 30 µg, and 100 µg, as a 2-dose series, 28 days apart, and a single dose at 100 µg to compare with the current, approved, two dose regimen of 100 µg of mRNA-1273.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This is a lipid nanoparticle mRNA vaccine, isn't it?
Bit of a blow for Pfizer, I'd think...


----------



## 2hats (Mar 19, 2021)

8ball said:


> This is a lipid nanoparticle mRNA vaccine, isn't it?
> Bit of a blow for Pfizer, I'd think...


Both BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 use lipid nanoparticles, to both protect the nucleic acid from degradation and then facilitate cell uptake followed by release into the cytoplasm.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 19, 2021)

Uh... yeah.


----------



## Doodler (Mar 19, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> A case of the virus seen mutating in a patient with a compromised immune system:
> 
> "During the patient’s stay, 23 viral samples were available for analysis, the majority from his nose and throat. Between days 66 and 82, following the first two administrations of plasma, the team saw a dramatic shift in the virus population, with the mutated virus becoming dominant. Although this variant initially appeared to die away, it re-emerged again when the third course of remdesivir and convalescent plasma therapy were administered.
> 
> ...



Not surprising, iirc increased viral mutation rates have been observed in cats with Feline Immunodeficiency Syndrome. This has been known about for a while.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 19, 2021)

Doodler said:


> Not surprising, iirc increased viral mutation rates have been observed in cats with Feline Immunodeficiency Syndrome. This has been known about for a while.



Not sure what you mean by "increased" here.  Increased from what?
In any case, FIV mutates quite a good bit faster than SARS-CoV-2.  

The interesting bit (to me) is the almost real-time evolution of the virus in response to a therapy within a single (albeit immunocompromised) patient. Not sure about what it changes in terms of our response, aside from the imperative to keep immunocompromised patients well isolated from each other.


----------



## Doodler (Mar 19, 2021)

8ball said:


> Not sure what you mean by "increased" here.  Increased from what?
> In any case, FIV mutates quite a good bit faster than SARS-CoV-2.



Increased relative to control animals that didn't have FIS. Mutational rates in FIV weren't measured, it was there to provide an immunocompromised environment for a different virus. (Again iirc, I will see if I can find a link.)


----------



## elbows (Mar 23, 2021)

I'm never happy when companies have possibly been selective with their data in order to sugar coat things.









						US agency questions AstraZeneca's Covid vaccine trial data
					

Drug firm may have provided incomplete view of efficacy data from US trial, says safety monitor




					www.theguardian.com
				






> The NIAID statement said the DSMB “was concerned by information released by AstraZeneca on initial data from its Covid-19 vaccine clinical trial. The DSMB expressed concern that AstraZeneca may have included outdated information from that trial, which may have provided an incomplete view of the efficacy data.”
> 
> It urged the company “to work with the DSMB to review the efficacy data and ensure the most accurate, up-to-date efficacy data be made public as quickly as possible”.





> UK scientists said it was unusual for a data safety monitoring board to intervene in public, although there were often debates with the manufacturers behind the scenes. “This is unprecedented in my opinion,” said Stephen Evans, professor of pharmacoepidemiology at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine.
> 
> “One explanation might well be that this trial is currently being conducted when there is a large amount of a new variant about more recently, and, as might be expected, the efficacy against that variant might be less, so more recent data shows reduced efficacy. Of course, the other vaccines may also show such reduced efficacy and we don’t know by how much.”
> 
> Evans said he was not particularly concerned, “unless they had found a safety issue that was being hidden, which does not appear to be the case”.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 25, 2021)

Just heard on TWIV Danish medical staff being advised to aspirate when giving AZ (uniquely ?) to avoid veins ?
The unstabilised spike was mentioned again more than once.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 25, 2021)




----------



## elbows (Mar 25, 2021)

elbows said:


> I'm never happy when companies have possibly been selective with their data in order to sugar coat things.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



A pretty modest adjustment now that they've included latest data:



> The Anglo-Swedish firm has now adjusted the efficacy rate of its vaccine from 79% to 76%.
> 
> Further data from the US trial showed efficacy among the over 65s rose from 80% to 85%.



Fergus Walsh says:



> It is now clear that the numbers have not moved by much and it begs the question why such a row over data was not conducted in private. AstraZeneca has risked reputational damage as a result of the public ticking off and senior figures are privately dismayed by the row.
> 
> So why didn't AstraZeneca simply wait? I'm told that the company felt a duty to publish results on Monday as soon as the agreed threshold of cases had been passed. A key reason was that there was a specific analysis showing there were no safety issues regarding blood clots. Given that a few EU countries are still not using the vaccine because of concerns over clots, this information would provide reassurance.











						Covid vaccine: AstraZeneca updates US vaccine efficacy results
					

The vaccine-maker slightly amends its efficacy rates as it awaits US regulatory approval.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




I'd actually prefer such rows and rebukes to be conducted in public, but I am aware that this has implications in terms of public perceptions etc. All the same, I believe in actual transparency and conducting stuff in the public sphere, not mere lip service to the principal whilst clinging firmly to all the usual justifications for handling stuff behind closed doors.


----------



## elbows (Mar 25, 2021)

These people seem to have had the right idea about how far behind Italy we were at the start. I'm posting it in this thread because this is just one small detail in a story about the impressive clinical trials the UK got up and running quickly:









						Covid: The London bus trip that saved maybe a million lives
					

A conversation on a bus led to the setting up of the Recovery trial, leading to treatments for Covid.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				






> The two bus passengers were Prof Martin Landray, a doctor and designer of large-scale drug trials, and Sir Jeremy Farrar, director of the Wellcome Trust, one of the world's biggest funders of medical research - and one of the funders of Recovery.
> 
> The date was 9 March 2020. The pair were discussing the impending pandemic, the scenes coming out of Italy, which was the first country in Europe to feel the devastating impact of the virus, and the inevitability of the UK facing the same.
> 
> "What we agreed on that bus trip was that the tsunami would arrive within a couple of weeks and we had to have a trial up and running within two weeks," Prof Landray told Inside Health on BBC Radio 4.


----------



## zahir (Mar 28, 2021)

More on the Astra Zeneca blood clotting issue (thread).


----------



## weltweit (Mar 29, 2021)

Should administrators of the AZ vaccine be aspirating on injecting?


----------



## LDC (Mar 29, 2021)

weltweit said:


> Should administrators of the AZ vaccine be aspirating on injecting?



Not the advice currently, and there's no evidence to suggest anything needs to change.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 30, 2021)

AstraZeneca vaccine renamed ..."Vaxzevria" 

Doubtless planned for a while, but will probably fuel the conspiracies ...





__





						Vaxzevria (previously COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca) - European Medicines Agency
					

Vaxzevria (previously COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca)




					www.ema.europa.eu
				




Covid-19 : critiqué, AstraZeneca rebaptise son vaccin Vaxzevria
L’Agence européenne du médicament a validé le changement de nom du vaccin du labo anglo-suédois. Le sérum, lui, ne change pas.

Par Le Parisien 
Le 30 mars 2021 à 16h36









						Covid-19 : critiqué, AstraZeneca rebaptise son vaccin Vaxzevria
					

L’Agence européenne du médicament a validé le changement de nom du vaccin du labo anglo-suédois. Le sérum, lui, ne change pas.




					www.leparisien.fr


----------



## elbows (Apr 1, 2021)

Because of recent events such as Germany restricting AZ vaccine for the under 60's ( eg Covid: Germany limits use of AstraZeneca Covid jab for under-60s ), the BBC have taken another look at the issues involved.









						AstraZeneca: Is there a blood clot risk?
					

Unusual clots have been detected in a handful of people after being injected with the jab.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 1, 2021)

Good article about why some of us feel shit after the jab and others feel nothing at all: Vaccine side effects: My experience of them and what they mean


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 1, 2021)

I hope they figure this out quickly -  given the AZ ostensibly delivers the same result - spike proteins at the cell membrane for T cells to target.
The MRNA vaccines at the moment look like being the winner - apart from the storage temperature issues - and rare allergic reactions to the lipid nano-wotsits...


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 2, 2021)

.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 2, 2021)

.


----------



## Cloo (Apr 12, 2021)

Possible treatment that could aid recovery and reduce harm to vulnerable people who catch COVID: Covid: Asthma drug 'speeds up recovery at home'


----------



## 2hats (May 13, 2021)

There are some 20-odd studies now indicating that one mRNA vaccine dose in convalescents provoke a strong antibody immunoresponse (can be ten to hundred fold that of seronegatives). Here the first longitudinal T cell study examining responses to (mRNA) doses in convalescents and the infection naive also suggesting that the former only require one dose and, mirroring antibody responses, the T cell response typically appears to be greater. The study also confirms cross-variant T cell reactivity and additionally suggests that convalescents post-vaccination T cells may better home to the respiratory tract.





DOI: 10.1101/2021.05.12.443888.


----------



## two sheds (May 13, 2021)

Cloo said:


> Possible treatment that could aid recovery and reduce harm to vulnerable people who catch COVID: Covid: Asthma drug 'speeds up recovery at home'


Came out a while ago - strange that the article doesn't mention that it's the brown inhaler. Hopefully other steroid inhalers will help too.


----------



## Supine (May 13, 2021)

Covid/Flu combination vax are being trialled. If it works it’s be a great way to keep on top of both virus’s with one visit to a gp.


----------



## 2hats (May 22, 2021)

2hats said:


> Results of Novavax phase III UK trial (15,000 adults 18-84 years of age, including 27% over age 65) just beginning to surface. NVX-CoV2373 (two dose protein sub-unit) 100% effective against severe disease, hospitalisation and death. 96.4% effective against original SARS-CoV-2 virus and 86.3% effective against B.1.1.7.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Preprint confirming NVX-CoV2373 phase III trial results. 89.7% efficacy with respect to symptomatic infection against a mix of B.1.1.7 and earlier variants after second dose (21 day dosing interval). No hospitalisations or deaths in the vaccine arm. >15k participants, >27% 65+, 48.5% female, 94.5% white, 45% had comorbidities for increased risk from COVID-19. Reactogenicity mild and transient, few serious adverse events.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.05.13.21256639





EUA filing perhaps in July if multi-site manufacturing consistency issues can be ironed out. Manufacturer also looking to set up production in Australia to supply the Asia-Pacific region.


----------



## 2hats (May 25, 2021)

TeenCOVE phase 2/3 study in the US of mRNA-1273 in 3,700 participants aged 12-17. No cases of COVID-19 were observed in participants who had received two doses of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. In addition, a vaccine efficacy of 93% (to symptomatic infection) in seronegative participants was observed starting 14 days after the first dose (confirmed by PCR).




__





						Moderna Announces TeenCOVE Study of its COVID-19 Vaccine in Adolescents Meets Primary Endpoint and Plans to Submit Data to Regulators in Early June | Moderna, Inc.
					

Primary endpoint of non-inferior immunogenicity versus the Phase 3 study adult comparator group was met No cases of COVID-19 observed after two doses of vaccine using the primary case definition, consistent with a vaccine efficacy of 100% Safety and tolerability generally consistent with Phase 3




					investors.modernatx.com


----------



## elbows (May 25, 2021)

Good stuff, although I suppose for the sake of completeness I have to note they did it at a time where only 4 people in the placebo group ended up getting infected.


----------



## 2hats (May 26, 2021)

Another single dose mRNA vaccine for seropositives study, here from the Netherlands. This one widens the knowledge base, using BNT162b2, indicating a strong immune response within a week of one dose, with neutralising antibody titres far exceeding those of seronegatives (control group measured two weeks after second dose). This was found to be true for a broad range of ages (22-88 years), for a range of previous COVID infections (mild-moderate-severe-critical), was largely unaffected by comorbidities, and little affected by time since infection (from 1 to 15 months). As in other vaccine studies, younger participants, female participants, had a tendency towards slightly higher neutralisation responses.
 
DOI: 10.1101/2021.05.25.21257797.


----------



## 2hats (May 26, 2021)

And again! Here a study of humoral and cellular immune responses after each dose (of BNT162b2) for seropositives, compared to seronegatives. As before, large antibody and T cell responses after a single dose for convalescents. Also, T cell activation preserved across B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 variants.









DOI: 10.1126/sciimmunol.abj1750.


----------



## 2hats (May 28, 2021)

MHRA regulatory approval for the single dose recombinant, replication incompetent, adenovirus vector vaccine Janssen (Johnson & Johnson_)_ Ad26.COV2-S EUA in the UK.


----------



## elbows (May 28, 2021)

Some of the UK attempts to analyise effectiveness of vaccines to prevent symptomatic disease and mortality. Preprints from the month of May.









						Effectiveness of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine and ChAdOx1 adenovirus vector vaccine on mortality following COVID-19
					

We estimated risk of death in vaccinated compared to unvaccinated COVID-19 cases. Cases vaccinated with 1 dose of BNT162b2 had 44% reduced risk of death, 55% with 1 dose of ChAdOx1, and 69% with 2 doses of BNT162b2. This is on top of the protection provided against becoming a case.  ###...




					www.medrxiv.org
				












						Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against the B.1.617.2 variant
					

Background The B.1.617.2 COVID-19 variant has contributed to the surge in cases in India and has now been detected across the globe, including a notable increase in cases in the UK. We estimate the effectiveness of the BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 COVID-19 vaccines against this variant.  Methods A test...




					www.medrxiv.org


----------



## elbows (Jun 8, 2021)

This isnt a treatment but I was lacking ideas about which thread to stick it in.


----------



## prunus (Jun 8, 2021)

elbows said:


> This isnt a treatment but I was lacking ideas about which thread to stick it in.




“*It is known that the human leukocyte antigen gene identified, HLA-DRB1*04:01, is directly correlated to latitude and longitude. This means more people in the North and West of Europe are likely to have this gene. 

This suggests that populations of European descent will be more likely to remain asymptomatic but still transmit the disease to susceptible populations*.”

Interesting given the observed outcomes differential in ethnic groups in the UK; also perhaps severity of outbreak in Italy?


----------



## elbows (Jun 8, 2021)

prunus said:


> “*It is known that the human leukocyte antigen gene identified, HLA-DRB1*04:01, is directly correlated to latitude and longitude. This means more people in the North and West of Europe are likely to have this gene.
> 
> This suggests that populations of European descent will be more likely to remain asymptomatic but still transmit the disease to susceptible populations*.”
> 
> Interesting given the observed outcomes differential in ethnic groups in the UK; also perhaps severity of outbreak in Italy?


I havent had much time to think about the details.

And I suppose it gets complicated quickly - eg asymptomatic cases and transmission are really bad news for controlling the size of outbreaks.

There are probably numerous reasons why parts of Italy had a bad wave, very much including the fact their early surveillance was very poor. If you dont really notice that youve got community transmission until you start noticing plenty of deaths 'all of a sudden' (when reality was not actually so sudden, just detection of it was sudden), then thats a sign things are going to get very bad very quickly. And thats certainly what happened with Italy at the start, I remember using their first news of deaths as my main fire alarm at the time. None of that means you are saying anything wrong, just that there are multiple factors.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 10, 2021)

Preclinical testing in animal models of (non-prefusion-stabilised) AZD2816, which features B.1.351 spike, demonstrates strong immunoresponse to a one dose booster (to previous immunisation with AZD1222). Neutralisation titres against B.1.351, B.1.617.1 and B.1.617.2 were observed and no evidence of original antigenic sin was seen. The breadth of post two-dose AZD1222 cellular immune response was preserved (the frequency of antigen specific T cells was maintained). No clear indication of modification to address venous thrombosis issues.

DOI: 10.1101/2021.06.08.447308


----------



## 2hats (Jun 13, 2021)

Pre-clinical testing in animal models of Novavax  with B.1.351 spike protein, NVX-CoV2373 (rS-B.1.351). Strong immune response seen whether it was used alone, mixed or as a heterologous prime-boost to earlier vaccination with the original NVX-CoV2373 (rS-WU1), even a year later. It induced both protective antibody and cell-mediated responses that were effective against B.1.1.7 and B.1.351.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.06.08.447631.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 14, 2021)

Novavax have announced the outcome of their US/Mexico ~30k participant, placebo-controlled, observer-blinded, randomized study (during which time B.1.1.7 came to dominate).

NVX-CoV2373 (a protein-based recombinant nanoparticle vaccine with a saponin-based Matrix-M adjuvant) demonstrated overall efficacy of 90.4% (95% CI: 82.9, 94.6) to PCR confirmed symptomatic infection. Seventy-seven cases of COVID-19 infection were observed: 63 in the placebo group (10 moderate, 4 severe) and 14 in the vaccine group (all mild). This indicates a vaccine efficacy of 100% (95% CI: 87.0, 100) against moderate or severe disease. Sequencing of cases indicated 100% efficacy (95% CI: 80.8, 100) against non-VOC/VOI, with vaccine efficacy against VOC/VOI of 93.2% (95% CI: 83.9, 97.1). NVX-CoV2373 also showed success among "high-risk" populations (defined as 65+, and <65 with certain comorbidities, or having life circumstances with frequent COVID-19 exposure): here vaccine efficacy was 91.0% (95% CI: 83.6, 95.0).

Safety data from the trial indicated the vaccine was generally well tolerated.

Novavax intend to seek regulatory approval in the US and Europe by the end of September, by which time they hope to be producing around 100 million doses per month, rising to 150 million per month by the end of the year.

No preprint yet, but a press release is available.


----------



## elbows (Jun 15, 2021)




----------



## Supine (Jun 17, 2021)

Amazing Horizon show where they follow five of the vaccine teams through the vaccine development process. So proud of science 









						BBC Two - Horizon, 2021, Horizon Special: The Vaccine
					

The extraordinary inside story of the vaccine scientists who took on Covid-19 - and won.




					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## William of Walworth (Jun 18, 2021)

Supine said:


> Amazing Horizon show where they follow five of the vaccine teams through the vaccine development process. So proud of science
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The Guardian's Lucy Mangan reviews that programme here -- she was so positive, that it made me want to watch it ASAP!


----------



## 2hats (Jun 19, 2021)

Preprint of a new study (largely out of Oxford), of convalescent and vaccinee sera (collected across the UK) versus recent VOCs, suggests that those sera show reduced neutralisation of B.1.617.1 and B.1.617.2. Additionally sera from B.1.351 and P.1 convalescents exhibit a marked reduction in neutralisation of B.1.617.2. The authors find that the VOCs B.1.351, P.1 and B.1.617.2 are antigenically divergent - convalescent sera from one barely neutralises the other. The authors conclude that vaccines based on B.1.1.7 may broadly protect against current variants. Vaccinees receiving AZD1222 or BNT162b2 were found to still produce good neutralising titres against B.1.617.2 (only modest reductions).





DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2021.06.020.

Note: Vaccine sera collected 1-4 weeks post second dose. Some of the AZD1222 vaccinees were in the early LD/SD trial arm. Mean age of BNT162b2 vaccinees was 37 years.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 21, 2021)

Worth noting that the CureVac mRNA vaccine candidate phase 2b/3 study results have been announced. A disappointing 47% efficacy to COVID-19 disease of any severity. In particular, efficacy was lower in older participants.









						Homepage - CureVac
					

Als ein weltweit führendes biopharmazeutisches Unternehmen streben wir danach, richtungsweisende Medikamente zu entwickeln, um das Leben von Menschen zu schützen und zu verbessern. Angetrieben durch unsere RNA-Technologieplattform und zwei Jahrzehnte Exzellenz in Wissenschaft und Produktion...




					www.curevac.com


----------



## 2hats (Jun 21, 2021)

From France, a longitudinal study of memory B cell response and neutralisation in convalescent recipients of mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2) versus non-convalescent. The convalescents (severe: S-CoV; mild: M-CoV) received one dose (here termed 'boost') typically just under one year after original infection and were compared to naive subjects receiving the standard two dose vaccination regimen.

Yet again the high immunoresponses (IgG antibody levels) of convalescents receiving single-dose was noted, but also the breadth of memory B cell responses two months later. Notably, sera of single-dose recovered patients had neutralisation potency to B.1.351, whilst sera of fully vaccinated naive subjects were significantly less capable in this respect. This and other observations suggest that maturation of B cells after repeated exposure to spike (whether natural infection or mRNA vaccination mediated) likely offers protection against a wide range of variants (which could bolster the case for periodic booster doses, particularly focussed on non-convalescents).


> these data describe an immune response maturing with time in SARSCoV-2 convalescent patients, and resulting in a massive, high-affinity response after vaccination, which [...] displays an improved recognition of the RBD variants [ie VOCs] as well. In this immune evolution scheme, the response of naive vaccinees nevertheless lags behind the maturation process that took place during infection. Our observations suggest that repeated challenges, even against the original spike protein, will compensate for these differences by recall of affinity-matured memory B cells and allow vaccinated people to cope efficiently with most variants actually described.





DOI: 10.1101/2021.06.17.448459.


----------



## Aladdin (Jun 21, 2021)

How long will full Pfizer vaccination protect against the Delta variant? Is there anything out on this and in layman's terms?


----------



## elbows (Jun 21, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> How long will full Pfizer vaccination protect against the Delta variant? Is there anything out on this and in layman's terms?



They cant tell in advance of it waning. They cannot speed up time when doing such experiments, so this is something that will become evident only when a time comes that real-world surveillance of the situation points in such a direction.

Plus if they just try to figure it out using waning antibody levels then they are missing out other important aspects of the immune response, such as at the cellular level, via t-cells etc.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 21, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> How long will full Pfizer vaccination protect against the Delta variant? Is there anything out on this and in layman's terms?



Long term is unknown with all current vaccines, because they haven't been around long enough.

In the here & now, IIRC, it offers 96% protection against severe illness & hospitalisation from the Delta variant, 92% for the AZ vaccine.

Yep...



> The analysis suggests:
> 
> 
> the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is 96% effective against hospitalisation after 2 doses
> the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine is 92% effective against hospitalisation after 2 doses











						Vaccines highly effective against hospitalisation from Delta variant
					

New analysis by PHE shows for the first time that 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccines are highly effective against hospitalisation from the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant.




					www.gov.uk


----------



## elbows (Jun 21, 2021)

And if/when the real world data suggests something is happening, they will have to be careful to see if they can determine whether its actually caused by waning immunity as opposed to a new variant that can escape some chunk of prior immunity.


----------



## Aladdin (Jun 21, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> Long term is unknown with all current vaccines, because they haven't been around long enough.
> 
> In the here & now, IIRC, it offers 96% protection against severe illness & hospitalisation from the Delta variant, 92% for the AZ vaccine.
> 
> ...



This may be a stupid question but will  vaccination stop you *getting* the virus ?


----------



## Aladdin (Jun 21, 2021)

elbows said:


> They cant tell in advance of it waning. They cannot speed up time when doing such experiments, so this is something that will become evident only when a time comes that real-world surveillance of the situation points in such a direction.
> 
> Plus if they just try to figure it out using waning antibody levels then they are missing out other important aspects of the immune response, such as at the cellular level, via t-cells etc.




So does this really mean that the pandemic is not over even when we are at 85% to 90% population vaccinated?


----------



## 2hats (Jun 21, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> How long will full Pfizer vaccination protect against the Delta variant? Is there anything out on this and in layman's terms?


Unknown and will vary from individual to individual.


Sugar Kane said:


> This may be a stupid question but will  vaccination stop you *getting* the virus ?


Only via risk reduction at the population level. At the level of virus challenge of an individual, no. To what degree it replicates though will, again, vary from individual to individual.


----------



## prunus (Jun 21, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> This may be a stupid question but will  vaccination stop you *getting* the virus ?



Yes. At least some of the time, with some not yet precisely quantified.


----------



## Aladdin (Jun 21, 2021)

2hats said:


> Unknown and will vary from individual to individual.
> 
> Only via risk reduction at the population level. At the level of virus challenge of an individual, no. To what degree it replicates though will, again, vary from individual to individual.



That is quite worrying.


----------



## prunus (Jun 21, 2021)

2hats said:


> Unknown and will vary from individual to individual.
> 
> Only via risk reduction at the population level. At the level of virus challenge of an individual, no. To what degree it replicates though will, again, vary from individual to individual.



I’m not sure that’s quite accurate, or rather it might be too accurate for a normal interpretation of what ‘getting’ the virus means, even if it turns out not to provide sterilising immunity in any cases.

I think it’s fair to categorise the situation where one is exposed to the virus, it replicates a bit in your cells but is shut down hard by your (vaccine derived) immune response to the extent where you have no effects and have an effective zero probability of passing it on (due to negligible load and or shedding) as ‘not getting the virus’ for most purposes.


----------



## Aladdin (Jun 21, 2021)

Just one more basic question...
So say a fully vaccinated person gets a variant and doesnt get sick....can they pass it on to someone else who has not been fully vaccinated?


----------



## Badgers (Jun 21, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> This may be a stupid question but will  vaccination stop you *getting* the virus ?


No.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 21, 2021)

Sugar Kane said:


> Just one more basic question...
> So say a fully vaccinated person gets a variant and doesnt get sick....can they pass it on to someone else who has not been fully vaccinated?


Yes.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 21, 2021)

At the testing centres this week we have had a lot of (as a %) double vaccinated people with no symptoms (vaccine working for them) testing positive.

Including a family of five with parents both working and three kids in school/college. All positive.


----------



## Aladdin (Jun 21, 2021)

prunus said:


> I’m not sure that’s quite accurate, or rather it might be too accurate for a normal interpretation of what ‘getting’ the virus means, even if it turns out not to provide sterilising immunity in any cases.
> 
> I think it’s fair to categorise the situation where one is exposed to the virus, it replicates a bit in your cells but is shut down hard by your (vaccine derived) immune response to the extent where you have no effects and have an effective zero probability of passing it on (due to negligible load and or shedding) as ‘not getting the virus’ for most purposes.



Thanks prunus 
Your previous post answers my question... 👍


----------



## 2hats (Jun 21, 2021)

prunus said:


> I’m not sure that’s quite accurate, or rather it might be too accurate for a normal interpretation of what ‘getting’ the virus means, even if it turns out not to provide sterilising immunity in any cases.
> 
> I think it’s fair to categorise the situation where one is exposed to the virus, it replicates a bit in your cells but is shut down hard by your (vaccine derived) immune response to the extent where you have no effects and have an effective zero probability of passing it on (due to negligible load and or shedding) as ‘not getting the virus’ for most purposes.


For the sense of 'getting' such that there is active virus in your body. What your immune system does with it and how swiftly really depends on the performance of your immune system (ie response to vaccine and/or previous infection). That's going to vary (for different individuals) between "shut down hard" and progression through N generations (hence 'breakthrough').


Sugar Kane said:


> That is quite worrying.


Not really. 'Worrying' is that it will take at least 3-5 years (optimistically) to vaccinate ~80% of the global population. Plenty of time for SARS-CoV-2 to experiment with escape strategies.


----------



## Aladdin (Jun 21, 2021)

2hats said:


> 'Worrying' is that it will take at least 3-5 years (optimistically) to vaccinate ~80% of the global population. Plenty of time for SARS-CoV-2 to experiment with escape strategies.



Agreed..that is a huge concern.


----------



## Supine (Jun 21, 2021)

2hats said:


> Not really. 'Worrying' is that it will take at least 3-5 years (optimistically) to vaccinate ~80% of the global population. Plenty of time for SARS-CoV-2 to experiment with escape strategies.



where is that estimate from? I thought the plan was to have everybody vaccinated by end of next year. The industry is scaling up to produce enough to do so.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 21, 2021)

Supine said:


> where is that estimate from? I thought the plan was to have everybody vaccinated by end of next year. The industry is scaling up to produce enough to do so.


And distribution to the end recipients? Production!=jabs in arms. Will be happy to see it done in 2 years but persons I speak/listen to in global public health seem to be talking about several years.


----------



## elbows (Jun 21, 2021)

Regarding vaccination and transmission, this is the sort of thing they were coming up with at the end of April, based on early analysis:









						One dose of COVID-19 vaccine can cut household transmission by up to half
					

A new study by Public Health England (PHE) has shown that one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine reduces household transmission by up to half.




					www.gov.uk


----------



## 2hats (Jun 24, 2021)

A new study preprint, on vaccine evasion, out of Ravi Gupta's lab (Cambridge) suggests that B.1.617.2, delta, demonstrates a significant degree of immune evasion and fitness (compared to B.1.1.7, alpha). They found that delta was both more efficient at infecting respiratory tract cells, and exhibited more spike (facilitating enhanced virus cell entry) than alpha. Testing sera from vaccinees they found around 8-9 fold reduction in delta compared to original wild type. They estimate that delta gains a transmissibility advantage of between 10-40% and an immunity escape advantage of around 20-55% over previous variants.

Relative reductions in neutralisation by convalescent and vaccinee sera, respectively:









Looking at vaccinated healthcare workers they found that whilst severe disease was rare, transmission clusters were much larger than for previous variants.


> At population scale, extensive vaccination will likely protect against moderate to severe disease and will reduce transmission of the Delta variant. However, vaccine breakthrough clusters amongst healthcare workers is of concern given that hospitals frequently treat individuals who may have suboptimal immune responses to vaccination due to comorbidity. Such patients could be at risk for severe disease following infection from healthcare workers or other staff within hospital environments. Therefore strategies to boost vaccine responses against variants are warranted in healthcare workers and attention to infection control procedures should be continued even in the post vaccine era.


DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-637724/v1.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 24, 2021)

Cuban protein sub-unit vaccine Abdala (three dose regimen) reported, by BioCubaFarma, to demonstrate 92.28% efficacy to infection in clinical trials. No preprint or details as of yet.








						Cuba says Abdala vaccine 92.28% effective against coronavirus
					

Cuba said on Monday its three-shot Abdala vaccine against the coronavirus had proved 92.28% effective in last-stage clinical trials.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Jun 25, 2021)

Two more (refereed) studies about the super-immunity of single mRNA dose convalescents and some thoughts on the phenomena.

In the first study (Fred Hutch/UWash) prevaccination sera from recovered donors neutralised early type and sporadically neutralised B.1.351, but a single mRNA dose boosted neutralising titres against all variants (and even SARS-CoV-1) by up to 1000-fold, suggesting it will provide protection against emerging variants too. This neutralisation was not boosted by a second dose, suggesting that that could be delayed. Immunisation of naïve donors also elicited cross-neutralising responses but at lower titres, highlighting the importance of vaccinating both uninfected and previously infected persons to elicit cross-variant neutralising antibodies.

DOI:  10.1126/science.abg9175.

In the second study (Imperial) longitudinal evolution of T and B cell responses in healthcare workers vaccinated with BNT162b2, both with or without prior infection, was analysed. After the first dose individuals with prior infection showed enhanced T cell immunity, antibody-secreting memory B cell response to the spike protein, and neutralising antibodies effective against variants B.1.1.7 and B.1.351. By comparison, healthcare workers without prior infection, receiving a single dose, exhibited reduced immunity against variants. They found that single-dose vaccination after infection with a heterologous variant achieved similar levels of S1 RBD binding antibodies to two doses in naïve vaccinated individuals, along with substantial response to variants, whilst a second dose for those same convalescent individuals offered no additional enhancement.
DOI:  10.1126/science.abh1282.

In the same issue of _Science_, Crotty (LJI/UCSD), provides commentary and thoughts on this super-charged 'hybrid immunity' (single-dose convalescent immune response) and the key role of immunological memory - in particular the interplay of T and B cells and the epitope breadth of T cells arising from natural infection. This could point to heterologous prime-boost approaches as being the way forward. 


> Why does this pronounced neutralizing breadth occur? Memory B cells are a primary reason. They have two major functions: one is to produce identical antibodies upon reinfection with the same virus, and the other is to encode a library of antibody mutations, a stockpile of immunological variants. These diverse memory B cells, created in response to the original infection, appear to be pre-emptive guesses by the immune system as to what viral variants may emerge in the future. This brilliant evolutionary strategy is observed clearly for immunity to SARS-CoV-2: A substantial proportion of memory B cells encode antibodies that are capable of binding or neutralizing VOCs, and the quality of those memory B cells increases over time. Thus, the increase in variant-neutralizing antibodies after vaccination of previously SARS-CoV-2-infected persons reflects recall of diverse and high-quality memory B cells generated after the original infection.
> 
> T cells are required for the generation of diverse memory B cells. The evolution of B cells in response to infection, or vaccination, is powered by immunological microanatomical structures called germinal centers, which are T cell–dependent, instructed by T follicular helper (TFH) CD4+ T cells. Thus, T cells and B cells work together to generate antibody breadth against variants. Additionally, T cells appear to be important at the recall stage. Memory B cells do not actively produce antibodies; they are quiescent cells that only synthesize antibodies upon reinfection or subsequent vaccination. Memory B cells are increased 5- to 10-fold in hybrid immunity compared with natural infection or vaccination alone. Virus-specific CD4+ T cells and TFH cells appear to be key drivers of the recall and expansion of those SARS-CoV-2 memory B cells and the impressive antibody titers observed.
> 
> ...


DOI:  10.1126/science.abj2258.


----------



## elbows (Jun 28, 2021)

I havent had time to read about this at all yet.


----------



## belboid (Jun 28, 2021)

Seems a bit premature.  The first folk only got a vaccine 13 months ago.  The AZ trial is just finishing, officially.  I sent off my last swab today and have one more hospital appointment in September.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 29, 2021)

An extension of an earlier study (DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01290-3) of young, healthy staff volunteers from the Crick/UCL looking into vaccine induced immunity. Here data from AZD1222 to compare with previous and new BNT162b2 data regarding neutralisation of several variants: early type, D614G, B.1.1.7, B.1.351, and B.1.617.2.

As reported many times for mRNA recipients, reported here for the first time, a very large immune response for convalescents after a single dose of AZD1222 was observed, producing antibody neutralising titres typically exceeding that of non-convalescents after two doses. The convalescent response had significant neutralising capability across variants (with reductions across variant types seen in line with previous studies), compared to the previously uninfected. A second dose for convalescents resulted in only a small increase in neutralisation, perhaps related to the 'slow burn' nature of the immune response to viral vector platforms.
 
AZD1222 recipients (median age 34 years) were found to have lower neutralising antibody titres against all tested variants compared to BNT162b2 recipients (median age 42 years). This was even more pronounced when age matched.

DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01462-8.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 30, 2021)

On increasing the prime-boost dosing interval (here of AZD1222) and a third booster - a preprint from the Oxford Vaccine Group/Jenner on the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of such a delayed second or additional third dose in volunteers aged 18-55 years who were enrolled in the earliest phase 1/2 or phase 2/3 trials. 

They found that a longer delay (here around 10 months) between first and second dose of AZD1222 lead to a significantly increased antibody titre after the second dose, higher than that seen shortly after the previous two doses. An additional third booster dose of the same induced antibodies to a level that correlated with high efficacy after second dose and boosted T cell responses (there was insufficient data on the effect of delaying the second dose as regards T cell response). Higher titre neutralising antibodies against B.1.1.7, B.1.351 and B.1.617.2 variants were induced after a third dose vaccination when compared with titres induced after the second dose.

Longitudinal results for single dose AZD1222 indicated only a moderate (~3-fold) reduction in antibody tires over the first year.

Reactogenicity was observed to be lower after the second or third dose than after the first.

DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3873839.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 30, 2021)

2hats said:


> Have just noticed that the UK Com-COV heterologous prime-boost study (mixing AZD1222 and BNT162b2) is scheduled to deliver first immunological data later this month (early results were purely announcements concerning safety and reactogenicity).


The Com-COV preprint on immunogenicity of heterologous AZD1222/BNT162b2 schedules has found that, in a randomised controlled trial (participants >50 years, no previous SARS-CoV-2 infection), at day 28 post-boost (day 56 post-prime) SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG levels of both heterologous schedules were higher than those of the approved AZD1222 homologous schedule. This supports adopting a flexible approach in the use of heterologous prime-boost vaccination using AZD1222 and BNT162b2 vaccines.

Above: A) SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG levels ; B) pseudotype virus (VSV wild type) neutralising antibody levels; and C) cellular response. Dotted vertical line represents the second dose (boost).
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3874014.

Note also:








						Jabs stockpiled for 'mix and match' vaccine boosters later this year to help UK live with Covid
					

Scientists have warned it is too early to make a final decision on what vaccines should be used as boosters




					inews.co.uk


----------



## teuchter (Jun 30, 2021)

What's currently the best information on the effectiveness of the Pfizer/AZ vaccines against Delta variant, according to time elapsed since 1st and 2nd doses?

(In an ideal world - shown as risk of hospitalisation and broken down by age group, and illustrated in a nice chart or graph)


----------



## 2hats (Jun 30, 2021)

A preprint from Moderna studying mRNA-1273 performance in the face of numerous variants of concern/under investigation, VOC/VUI.

Sera from vaccinees on the standard schedule exhibited small reductions in efficacy relative to earlier D614G type for many of the VOC/VUI  (performed using VSV pseudovirus assay). Notably only a 2.1-fold reduction for B.1.617.2, delta, and a 1.2-fold reduction for B.1.1.7, alpha. Reductions for P.1, gamma, and B.1.351, beta, were larger (up to 8.4-fold for beta) but all the tested variants remained susceptible to neutralisation by the mRNA-1273 elicited serum.





DOI: 10.1101/2021.06.28.449914.


----------



## Brainaddict (Jul 1, 2021)

Don't know if this was mentioned above but Atlantic are hyping novavax as the best vaccine now and I see some new positive results came out recently: The mRNA Vaccines Are Extraordinary, but Novavax Is Even Better

In summary they claim it offers higher protection, with less side effects, and easier manufacturing and distribution, with a more tried and tested technology that people may trust more.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 1, 2021)

Brainaddict said:


> Don't know if this was mentioned above


Post #38,424 last week in the UK thread.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 2, 2021)

Curevac CVnCoV mRNA vaccine final data from their phase 2b/3 trial (40,000 participants) have been announced. It demonstrated vaccine efficacy of 48% against COVID-19 of any severity across all age groups and 15 variants. For participants aged 18 to 60 and across all 15 variants vaccine efficacy was 53% against disease of any severity, 77% against moderate and severe disease and it provided 100% protection against hospitalisation or death. A favourable safety profile was observed in all age groups. Curevac are now developing a second generation mRNA candidate, CV2CoV, with the aim of clinical trials later this year and regulatory approval in 2022.








						Homepage - CureVac
					

Als ein weltweit führendes biopharmazeutisches Unternehmen streben wir danach, richtungsweisende Medikamente zu entwickeln, um das Leben von Menschen zu schützen und zu verbessern. Angetrieben durch unsere RNA-Technologieplattform und zwei Jahrzehnte Exzellenz in Wissenschaft und Produktion...




					www.curevac.com


----------



## 2hats (Jul 2, 2021)

From Ravi Gupta's lab (Cambridge) an investigation (preprint) of (BNT162b2) mRNA vaccine mediated immune response in the elderly (140 participants, median age 72, 51% female).

After the first dose there is a marked decline in responses from around 80 years onwards with a far greater propensity to no detectable neutralising response to variants, emphasising the need to avoid extending the dosage interval where VOCs are prevalent.

This neutralising response rose after the second dose but titres were still lower in 80+, who were less likely to have B cell profiles associated with neutralisation.

Furthermore T cell IFN𝛾 and IL-2 responses in 80+ were lower after the second dose.

Notably (and unfortunately in the face of VOCs) post second dose neutralising titres were higher in 80+ if the dosing interval was extended (from 3 to 12 weeks) which may, perhaps, be another point to consider in regards of the advantages of providing a booster for this cohort this autumn, coming as it would some months after the original course.

DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-03739-1.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 2, 2021)

Just to note, Moderna mRNA-1273 now known as the brand name 'Spikevax' (Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 already branded 'Comirnaty', AstraZeneca AZD1222 'Vaxzevria').








						Moderna locks up Spikevax name in Europe, joins Pfizer's Comirnaty in wait for official brand approval in U.S.
					

Spikevax it is. Moderna has earned European Medicine Association approval for the brand name of its COVID-19 vaccine, even as it awaits an FDA decision. | Moderna has officially earned European Medicine Association approval for Spikevax as its COVID-19 vaccine brand name. Now, it joins Pfizer...




					www.fiercepharma.com


----------



## 2hats (Jul 2, 2021)

A prospective cohort study (CDC and others) of ~4k health care workers, some partially/fully vaccinated with mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273). Infection and viral load were monitored weekly via RT-PCR swabbing over four months (Dec 2020-Apr 2021) indicating attenuated viral load, reduced duration of detectability and a tendency towards a shorter period of any illness in all vaccinees.

Adjusted vaccine effectiveness was found to be 91% (95%CI: 76-97) with full vaccination and 81% (95%CI: 64-90) with partial vaccination. Where infected, the mean viral RNA load was 40% lower (95%CI: 16-57) in both partially and fully vaccinated participants than in those unvaccinated. Risk of fever was 58% lower (relative risk, 0.42; 95%CI 0.18-0.98) and the duration of illness was shorter, typically reduced by 2.3 days (95%CI: 0.8-3.7).
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2107058.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 2, 2021)

elbows said:


> I havent had time to read about this at all yet.



This is referencing DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-03738-2 wherein significant, persistent and barely diminished germinal centre B cell activity was observed some 4 months after the second mRNA dose (BNT162b2), in turn leading to a broader, more developed repertoire of B cells potentially capable of targeting a wide range of variants. Twinned with other study observations of B cell maturation for a year+ in convalescents, this is suggestive of perhaps a long lived, robust humoral immunity (greater degree of variant immune escape, immunosuppressed and age driven immunosenescence permitting - see above).


----------



## 2hats (Jul 2, 2021)

A phase II/III trial of a new Astrazeneca vaccine candidate AZD2816, an adenoviral platform with the spike protein based on the B.1.351 (beta) variant, to assess safety and immunogenicity.





						First COVID-19 variant vaccine AZD2816 Phase II/III trial participants vaccinated
					






					www.astrazeneca.com
				



Now recruiting 18+ year old participants in the UK - must have already had two doses of one of the approved vaccines at least 3 months ago.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 3, 2021)

Preprint of the results of a double-blind, randomised, controlled phase 3 trial (>25k healthy participants, 18-98 years, mean age 40.1, over 20% 'at risk' ie >60 years and/or existing co-morbidity and/or high BMI) of the Covaxin/BBV152 whole virion (D614G backbone) inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (with an Algel-IMDG alum adjuvant), conducted in India. This vaccine can be stored at 2-8C and is administered as two doses, 4 weeks apart.

An overall vaccine efficacy to symptomatic infection of 77.8% (95%CI: 65.2-86.4) was observed. Efficacy to severe symptomatic COVID-19 was 93.4% (95%CI: 57.1-99.8). Efficacy to asymptomatic COVID-19 was 63.6% (95%CI:29.0-82.4). Efficacy to symptomatic delta infection was 65.2% (95%CI: 33.1-83.0).




BBV152 was well tolerated with no serious adverse events observed - perhaps the lowest of any vaccine candidates thus far.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.06.30.21259439.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 3, 2021)

A mutation to look out for - P272L in the N-terminal domain of spike (Cardiff & others). Seen in some B.1.177 lineages, it appears to escape recognition by CD8 T cell responses in both convalescent patients and vaccinees. Functionally - it removes a prominent proline that plays a key role in T cell binding. The 269-277 epitope of spike is likely significant in this respect and warrants further monitoring.

DOI: 10.1101/2021.06.21.21259010.

Not entirely unrelated: a study of healthcare workers (UCL/Barts/Imperial/others) who were repeatedly found to be PCR and serologically negative throughout the UK first wave, but they exhibited a low-level increase in an innate blood transcriptomic signature of SARS-CoV-2 infection, which suggested they experienced transient/abortive infection. Notably, they had T cells that were stronger and more multispecific than an unexposed pre-pandemic cohort, and more frequently directed against the virion replication transcription complex (RTC) than those of convalescents. T cells, that target RTC epitopes, capable of cross-recognising seasonal human coronavirus variants, were identified in these 'exposed' non-convalescents. Their pre-existing RNA-polymerase-specific T cells expanded upon SARS-CoV-2 exposure in vivo - evidence of abortive seronegative SARS-CoV-2 infection with expansion of cross-reactive RTC-specific T cells.

DOI: 10.1101/2021.06.26.21259239.

Both studies underline why designers of next generation vaccines should consider a border range of virus proteins (eg RTC, nucleocapsid) and not just focus on spike.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 4, 2021)

A press release regarding a study of efficacy of Johnson & Johnson/Janssen Ad26.COV2.S single dose viral vector to VOCs in South Africa. Efficacy to moderate to serve disease due to beta/B.1.351 is around 64%. New data suggest this vaccine neutralises both beta/B.1.351 and (to a greater degree) delta/B.1.617.2 and gamma/P.1, particularly improving over 8 months. It is not yet clear on what timescale a booster, if any, might be warranted.

Preprint pending.








						Positive New Data for Johnson & Johnson Single-Shot COVID-19 Vaccine on Activity Against Delta Variant and Long-lasting Durability of Response | Johnson & Johnson
					

Demonstrated strong neutralizing antibody activity against the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant Persistent immune responses through at least eight months




					www.jnj.com


----------



## 2hats (Jul 4, 2021)

From India, a preprint of a study of Covishield (ChAdOx1/AZD1222) neutralisation of delta/B.1.617.2. Evaluations of sera (4 weeks post-vaccination) from single and double dose vaccinees, both previously uninfected and infected, and breakthrough cases. The now familiar story of prior infected (and breakthroughs) with one or two doses having higher neutralising titres (and so relatively higher protection) against earlier type B.1 (D614G) emerges, and here also for delta, when compared to convalescents with one or two doses.

DOI: 10.1101/2021.07.01.450676.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 4, 2021)

2hats said:


> Both studies underline why designers of next generation vaccines should consider a border range of virus proteins (eg RTC, nucleocapsid) and not just focus on spike.


Apropos of this, an animal study (University of Minnesota) of a human adenovirus viral vector vaccine expressing SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) protein (Ad5-N). A viral challenge of vaccinated mice was associated with rapid N-specific T cell recall responses in the respiratory mucosa. Lung viral loads were significantly lower in vaccinees exposed to both WA early type and alpha/B.1.1.7.
 
This study supports the rationale for including additional SARS-CoV-2 antigens into future vaccine candidates, to broaden epitope diversity, increase protection and lessen escape in the face of a wider range of both existing and new variants.
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.2100421.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 6, 2021)

A preprint of a longitudinal analysis over 1.8 million SARS-CoV-2 genomes from 183 countries/territories to capture vaccination-associated viral evolutionary patterns. It _might_ present the first evidence that vaccination is restricting the evolutionary and antigenic escape pathways accessible to SARS-CoV-2. 

At national level, diversity of the SARS-CoV-2 lineages appeared to be declining with increased rate of mass vaccination.
  
T cell epitopes were found to be significantly less mutated than B cell epitopes. This suggests antibody-interfacing antigenic sites are under a stronger selection pressure compared to the T cell binding epitopes: breakthrough and escape mutations have a higher likelihood of occurring in neutralising antibody-binding residues on the spike, whilst T cell responses are better conserved across VOCs.

Additionally, in vaccine breakthrough patients, SARS-CoV-2 exhibited significantly lower diversity in known B cell epitopes compared to unvaccinated COVID-19 patients, and they also displayed fewer COVID-associated complications and pre-existing conditions relative to unvaccinated patients.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.07.01.21259833.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 6, 2021)

Low dose (25µg instead of the current 100µg) mRNA-1273 produces spike antibodies comparable to convalescents; equivalent levels of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells at 6 months post-vaccination.





Subjects with pre-existing crossreactive CD4+ T cell memory had increased CD4+ T cell and antibody responses to the vaccine.




Potential implications for T cell response time and thus reduction in disease severity. Lower dosage could multiply stocks.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.06.30.21259787.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 6, 2021)

Ongoing work on Imperial's saRNA vaccine LNP-nCoVsaRNA (prefusion stabilised spike). Here a phase I trial involving a range of very low 0.1-10µg doses (cf. 100µg and 30µg for mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2, respectively). These were administered as two doses 4 weeks apart. Very well tolerated with clear dosage dependent reactogenticity. Immunogenicity response may point to the need to increasing the dosing interval and refinement to minimise innate recognition of saRNA. A trial with an updated candidate is already underway, looking to enhance RNA expression at very low dose level.








						Self-amplifying RNA COVID-19 vaccine technology safe in humans, suggests study | Imperial News | Imperial College London
					

Results from the first trial of a new COVID-19 vaccine technology show no short-term safety concerns.




					www.imperial.ac.uk


----------



## 2hats (Jul 7, 2021)

As per Com-COV (see previous post) another preprint to file under hybrid immunity. A study from Germany, arising from the switch to mRNA vaccines in the wake of elevated risk of AZD1222 linked VITT, heterologous prime-boost vaccination with AZD1222 prime followed by BNT162b2 mRNA boost (9-12 weeks later). A striking increase of vaccine-induced SARS-CoV-2 neutralising antibody activity was observed with significantly higher neutralising antibody titres than either homologous AZD1222 or homologous BNT162b2 vaccination.

DOI: 10.1101/2021.07.03.21258887.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 7, 2021)

2hats said:


> A press release regarding a study of efficacy of Johnson & Johnson/Janssen Ad26.COV2.S single dose viral vector to VOCs in South Africa. Efficacy to moderate to serve disease due to beta/B.1.351 is around 64%. New data suggest this vaccine neutralises both beta/B.1.351 and (to a greater degree) delta/B.1.617.2 and gamma/P.1, particularly improving over 8 months. It is not yet clear on what timescale a booster, if any, might be warranted.
> 
> *Preprint pending*.


Preprint - DOI: 10.1101/2021.07.01.450707.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 9, 2021)

Pfizer looking for US regulatory approval for a booster (third) dose of BNT162b2 (particularly in the elderly), sparked in part by evidence of waning antibodies after six months, but also the growth of delta. Though they are redesigning the vaccine to specifically target delta, they think that the current version will provide sufficient protection to it at this time.








						Pfizer, BioNTech to seek authorization for COVID booster shot as Delta variant spreads
					

Pfizer (PFE.N) and partner BioNTech (22UAy.DE) plan to ask U.S. and European regulators within weeks to authorize a booster dose of its COVID-19 vaccine, based on evidence of greater risk of infection six months after inoculation and the spread of the highly contagious Delta variant.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Jul 9, 2021)

From Qatar, a matched test-negative, case-controlled study of working age adults vaccinated with mRNA-1273 (standard posology), _perhaps_ appearing to offer better protection to beta/B.1.351. (Note - a predominately young demographic and doubtless a number of confounders).

Effectiveness against B.1.1.7 infection was 88.1% [95%CI: 83.7-91.5%] two weeks or more after the first dose.This rose to 100% [95%CI: 91.8-100.0%] from two weeks after the second dose. For B.1.351 infection this was 61.3% [95%CI: 56.5-65.5%] after the first dose, and 96.4% [95%CI: 91.9-98.7%] after the second. Effectiveness against any severe, critical or fatal COVID-19 disease was 81.6% [95%CI: 71.0-88.8%] after the first dose, rising to 95.7% [95%CI: 73.4-99.9%] after the second dose.
DOI: 10.1038/s41591-021-01446-y.


----------



## elbows (Jul 9, 2021)

Covid vaccines do work well in clinically vulnerable
					

A study of more than a million people shows those with other conditions get high protection from two doses.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Elpenor (Jul 9, 2021)

Heart inflammation link to Pfizer and Moderna jabs
					

But European regulators say the benefits of Covid vaccines continue to far outweigh the risks.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




Not sure if I should have second jab tomorrow now. My heart is dodgy and I occasionally get chest pains and breathlessness


----------



## prunus (Jul 9, 2021)

Elpenor said:


> Heart inflammation link to Pfizer and Moderna jabs
> 
> 
> But European regulators say the benefits of Covid vaccines continue to far outweigh the risks.
> ...



The risk is absolutely tiny. The risk to your heart from getting covid badly is many times greater.  Go get jabbed 

I am in the same position - dodgy heart etc. Not a second thought, the relative risk assessment is overwhelming.


----------



## platinumsage (Jul 9, 2021)

Elpenor said:


> Heart inflammation link to Pfizer and Moderna jabs
> 
> 
> But European regulators say the benefits of Covid vaccines continue to far outweigh the risks.
> ...



Last time I looked the risk was almost exclusively in the under-25s. Tens of millions of doses given to people over that age, millions of whom will have had dodgy hearts (it’s 10% of the Uk population according to BHF), yet basically no cases amongst them.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 9, 2021)

Highlighting strength of hybrid immunity to all variants, necessity of two doses for immunonaives, and perhaps waning of convalescent immunity after many months, two new studies.

A brief study (Emory) of convalescent (31-91 days post infection) and vaccine mediated (mRNA-1273 at 35-51 days, BNT162b2 at 7-27 days, each post second dose) sera neutralisation in live virus assays. Relative to earlier type (WA1/2020) kappa/B.1.617.1 was around 7x less susceptible, whilst delta/B.1.617.2 was around 3x less susceptible, to neutralisation by serum both from convalescents and vaccinees. Despite this finding, a majority of the convalescent sera (79% against kappa and 96% against delta) and vaccine mediated sera had detectable neutralising activity against both variants three months post-infection/second dose. Note the apparent greater degree of immune evasion exhibited by kappa over delta.

DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc2107799.

Second - an extension of an earlier study from France (Institut Pasteur). Here examining neutralisation of sera from convalescents, BNT162b2 and AZD1222 partial/full vaccinees and single dose convalescents (hybrid immunity).

In sera from convalescents at 6 months post-infection (Orléans cohort*) a 4-6x reduction in neutralisation titres (antibodies to spike) against delta/B.1.617.2 was observed (versus alpha and D614G); likewise for another group where sera was collected at 12 months (Strasbourg cohort*). Single dose recipient convalescents (mixture of mRNA-1273, BNT162b2, AZD1222; separate Strasbourg cohort) exhibited strong immunoresponses, which at 12 months post-infection (7-81 days post dose) exhibited a smaller reduction in neutralisation titres against all variants tested, particularly delta/B.1.617.2 and beta/B.1.351.

Classifying neutralisers and non-neutralisers, convalescents varied widely with only around half neutralising beta or delta after one year. All single dose convalescents neutralised all variants at one year. For recipients of Pfizer, with low levels of neutralisation seen after one dose, reduction in neutralising titres after two doses was around 3x for delta and 16x for beta (compared to alpha/B.1.1.7). For AstraZeneca recipients this was 5x and 9x for delta and beta, respectively. Single vaccines doses were poor at neutralising variants. _Might_ hint BNT162b2 recipients would benefit from a later third dose.
* significantly longer post-infection than for the first study (3 months versus 6, 12 months).
 
DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-03777-9.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 10, 2021)

The first interim analysis from the phase 1 trial (44k participants) of the Cuban conjugate protein subunit SOBERANA02 vaccine (2 doses, 28 days apart) with SOBERANA-Plus (protein subunit) as a third dose booster (28 days after the second dose). Dominant variant was beta/B.1.351.




Efficacy to infection of the 3 dose course was estimated at  75.7% [95%CI:60.7-85.0]. Efficacy to symptomatic disease was 91.2% [95%CI:77.9-96.5]. Efficacy to severe disease/death was 100%.

Final analysis for the SOBERANA02 (only) 2 dose course efficacy to symptomatic disease was 65.6% [95%CI:52.6-75.0].


----------



## 2hats (Jul 10, 2021)

Results of the Chinese (Sinovac) CoronaVac phase 3 double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial in Turkey (10k participants, aged 18-59, median age 45). CoronaVac is a whole virus inactivated vaccine (with an aluminium hydroxide adjuvant) administered in two doses, 14 days apart.

Efficacy to symptomatic COVID-19, 14 days after dose two, was 83.5% [95%CI: 65.4-92.1] with no deaths seen. The vaccine was well tolerated with a very low number of adverse events. During the early period of this trial the dominant variant was B.1.177 with some early type. In the latter stages alpha/B.1.1.7 came to dominate before giving way to beta/B.1.351.




DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01429-X.


----------



## Badgers (Jul 10, 2021)

Elpenor said:


> Heart inflammation link to Pfizer and Moderna jabs
> 
> 
> But European regulators say the benefits of Covid vaccines continue to far outweigh the risks.
> ...


Tiny risk but call your GP to be sure. 

With a dodgy heart the vaccine risk is far far lower than Covid


----------



## 2hats (Jul 10, 2021)

Valneva have registered a new phase 3 trial study starting this month, initial reporting by the end of the year. Investigating VLA2001 and VLA2101 (both whole virus inactivated adjuvanted vaccine candidates) in recruits aged 12 and older. No apparent official statement as to what the difference between VLA2001 and VLA2101 is (quite possibly seeded with different variants or even a mix, since dosing was established in phase 1/2 trials).


----------



## IC3D (Jul 10, 2021)

Not withstanding there is a potential for death still but this is why there isn't a vaccine for the common cold.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 11, 2021)

IC3D said:


> Not withstanding there is a potential for death still but this is why there isn't a vaccine for the common cold.



The problem with 'the common cold' as such, is it's not a single virus, it is caused by hundred of variants from several different 'virus families', rhinoviruses, coronaviruses, adenoviruses and enteroviruses being the most common.


----------



## elbows (Jul 11, 2021)

Thats certainly a big part of the reason things like the cold research unit didnt really get anywhere and got closed down a long time ago.

In terms of things like heart inflammation from Pfizer and Moderna, this phenomenon is perhaps mirroring the same inflammation seen after viral infection that is already known to happen in some young people, same sort of risk profile, ie affects young men.

The risk picture with some common cold viruses is complicated when zooming in, and hasnt received that much attention due to the numbers involved. For example its not hard to find studies that suggest that if you are old and are unlucky enough to require hospitalisation due to rhinovirus, the outcomes are worse than if you are old and hospitalised for influenza.  Or that young babies are more at risk of death from RSV than influenza. But note these risks are in relation to the subset of people who are ill enough to be hospitalised with such things, not the wider overall risks relative to the entire pool of infected people. More work is probably required on studying such things, but because the overall numbers are on the low side there has been a lack of impetus.

The minimum we should be doing on this front is to test, test and test again for as many of these viruses as possible so that we get a better picture of reality and tune treatments towards the actual cause.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 12, 2021)

From the Israeli Ministry of Health, information which appear to be part of the as yet unreleased data that are motivating Pfizer to seek authorisation from the FDA and EMA for a third booster.

This appears to suggest BNT162b2 vaccination breakthroughs (in 60+) are strongly correlated with earlier vaccinees (this signal continuing to strengthen). This may be indicative of waning protection from infection after about six months (and particularly in the face of new VOCs). Note (i) protection from serious illness and death maintained, (ii) this cohort includes a large number of the elderly and vulnerable who were vaccinated first, (iii) this is not entirely surprising as initial vaccination induced circulating antibodies would be expected to wane over time and particularly so in those experiencing immunosenescence and/or poor seroconversion.












						מחוסנים שחלו  בקורונה הם בדרך כלל אלה שהתחסנו ראשונים
					

משרד הבריאות בודק האם השפעת החיסונים מתחילה להיחלש אחרי כחצי שנה • נתונים שהוצגו לבכירי המשרד מצביעים על מתאם גובר בין מתחסנים מוקדמים והדבקות בווריאנט דלתא • מומחים מותחים ביקורת נוקבת: אין בנתונים כל הוכחה לכך




					www.yediot.co.il
				




The Israeli Health Minister has already acted on this, likely due to recent growth of delta, and has directed that adults with impaired immune systems, who had received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine, will be offered a booster shot immediately.








						Israel offers third shot of Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine to adults at risk
					

Israel said on Sunday it will begin offering a third dose of Pfizer Inc's (PFE.N) vaccine to adults with weak immune systems but it was still weighing whether to make the booster available to the general public.




					www.reuters.com
				




e2a: Israel have also decided to now provide Pfizer to children under the age of 12 who have underlying health issues.








						Health Ministry experts vote to vaccinate under-12s in exceptional cases
					

Decision coincides with Pfizer clinical trials on safety and efficacy of vaccine among children aged six months to 12 years, will be administered to those considered high risk; team for handling epidemics also okays third shot for residents of nursing homes as national infection rate hits 0.9%




					www.ynetnews.com


----------



## 2hats (Jul 13, 2021)

The FDA have advised that Johnson & Johnson/Janssen Ad26.COV2.S may be associated with an elevated risk of developing Guillain-Barré syndrome around two weeks (up to six weeks) after the single dose vaccination. This is observed predominately in older males. Note that the EMA recently advised a slightly elevated risk of developing Guillain-Barré syndrome in recipients of AstraZeneca AZD1222. This may point to a class effect in these viral vector vaccines.


----------



## Aladdin (Jul 13, 2021)

2hats said:


> The FDA have advised that Johnson & Johnson/Janssen Ad26.COV2.S may be associated with an elevated risk of developing Guillain-Barré syndrome around two weeks (up to six weeks) after the single dose vaccination. This is observed predominately in older males. Note that the EMA recently advised a slightly elevated risk of developing Guillain-Barré syndrome in recipients of AstraZeneca AZD1222. This may point to a class effect in these viral vector vaccines.




Is there anything on people who had Guillaine Barre in the past having  reactivated disease after vaccination with AZ?


----------



## 2hats (Jul 13, 2021)

The EMA are just monitoring for post-vaccination GBS right now and want healthcare professionals to be alert to the possibility and ensure reporting.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 14, 2021)

2hats said:


> A press release regarding a study of efficacy of Johnson & Johnson/Janssen Ad26.COV2.S single dose viral vector to VOCs in South Africa.


Details now published in the NEJM - DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc2108829.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 15, 2021)

Yet more promising heterologous results.

From Germany, a small study of AZD1222 (ChAd) only and AZD1222/BNT162b2 in young (mean age 38) healthcare workers. Significantly higher neutralising antibody responses (to recent VOCs) were seen in the mixed cohort (similar to those seen in the homologous BNT162b2 cohort), with strong spike directed T cells in both cohorts.







DOI: 10.1038/s41591-021-01449-9.

From Sweden, a small study of homologous AZD1222 (mean age 46) and mixed AZD1222/mRNA-1273 (mean age 40) responses in healthcare workers. Higher neutralising titres for the heterologous approach compared to AZD1222 only. Heterologous sera were able to neutralise beta/B.1.351, unlike those from a course of AZD1222.




DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc2110716.


----------



## platinumsage (Jul 15, 2021)

Nice to see that the WHO are on the ball as usual: 

"It’s a little bit of a dangerous trend here. We are in a data-free, evidence-free zone as far as mix and match"









						Mixing COVID-19 vaccines a ‘dangerous trend,’ WHO chief scientist says - National | Globalnews.ca
					

Canada has been mixing COVID-19 vaccine doses since June, after the National Advisory Committee on Immunization approved the idea.




					globalnews.ca


----------



## Supine (Jul 15, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> Nice to see that the WHO are on the ball as usual:
> 
> "It’s a little bit of a dangerous trend here. We are in a data-free, evidence-free zone as far as mix and match"
> 
> ...



They said it wasn’t good for individuals to make up their own rules about mixing and matching. That seems like good advice until formal trials have been completed.


----------



## platinumsage (Jul 15, 2021)

Supine said:


> They said it wasn’t good for individuals to make up their own rules about mixing and matching. That seems like good advice until formal trials have been completed.



WHO's chief scientist said it's a "dangerous trend " and "we are in a data-free, evidence-free zone" which is blatant scaremongering. What are all those people in countries where the health authorities are mixing and matching supposed to think about that? This is why she had to issue a clarification saying people should follow advice. Sure formal trials haven't been completed, but you could say the same about lots of aspects of the vaccination rollout, and that's not the same as there being no suitable data available on which to base decisions.


----------



## Riklet (Jul 15, 2021)

I hope my double-AZ'd parents get a Pfizer booster this autumn, based on that...


----------



## 2hats (Jul 15, 2021)

2hats said:


> Both studies underline why designers of next generation vaccines should consider a border range of virus proteins (eg RTC, nucleocapsid) and not just focus on spike.


From the US (Fred Hutch), a longitudinal study of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection in 254 patients that could further this idea.

Broad, durable immunity was seen for at least 8 months after infection (climbing to a plateau), featuring binding and neutralising antibodies with half-lives in excess of 200 days. Memory B cells, producing IgG antibodies to spike, proliferated and persisted, as did polyfunctional CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. The former equally targeting various SARS-CoV-2 epitopes, the latter preferentially targeting nucleocapsid proteins - perhaps highlighting the importance of considering those antigens when designing future vaccines, particularly in the face of new variants.

Additionally, it was noted that age and disease severity separately, independently drove higher adaptive immune responses (specifically in CD4+ T cell and humoral immunity to SARS-CoV-2), but there was little variation in this with gender.
DOI: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2021.100354.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 16, 2021)

From UCL, an investigation into waning antibody levels to the spike protein, S, in 605 fully vaccinated participants (53% female, 18-90+ years, median age 63, 19% extremely clinically vulnerable, 31% clinically vulnerable; 33% received BNT162b2, 67% AZD1222). Participants provided samples 14-154 days after their second dose.

As noted previously, those with previous infection typically had much higher S-antibody levels than vaccinated non-convalescents. The data suggested waning of S-antibody levels in infection-naive individuals over a 3-10 week period after a second dose of either BNT162b2 or AZD1222, not dissimilar to waning antibodies seen in convalescents shortly after infection, although memory B cell populations are maintained. This behaviour was preserved over age, sex and clinical vulnerability.

DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01642-1.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 16, 2021)

A new analysis of UK data, broadly consistent with earlier estimates from PHE (DOI: 10.1101/2021.05.22.21257658, DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc2107717), concludes that there is around a halving of the secondary attack rate in households following (at least single dose) vaccination. This approach is attempting to avoid the problem of test data missing asymptomatic infections and those where tests have not been requested.
arXiv:2107.06545.

For reference, from the latest PHE COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report, Week 28 (green=high confidence, amber=medium confidence, red=low confidence):


----------



## 2hats (Jul 21, 2021)

Further studies looking at cellular responses, and vaccine efficacy, in previously infected and uninfected individuals.

From Yale, a study examining antibody and T cell responses in previously infected and infection-naive individuals (40 healthcare workers, median age 45, 80% female) who received both doses of mRNA vaccines (80% mRNA-1273, 20% BNT162b2). While both groups retained neutralisation capacity against all variants, plasma (sampled several times up to 98 days post first dose) from previously-infected vaccinees displayed overall better neutralisation capacity across a range of VOCs, and resilience to key mutations in the RBD, than that of non-convalescents. Time since infection may play a role.

IgG levels were, as seen elsewhere, higher in convalescents after one dose, and their anti-N antibody titres (obviously not present in non-convalescents) were stable over time (unaffected by vaccination). Neutralisation assays conducted point to L452R in combination with E484K and N501Y perhaps being a more concerning combination for vaccine escape.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.07.14.21260307.

From the US (SJCRH), a small study of epitope-specific T cells elicited after natural SARS-CoV-2 infection, and (BNT162b2) vaccination of both naive and recovered individuals (19 individuals, ages roughly 40-50 years).

BNT162b2 induced a strikingly potent CD8 T cell response, comparable in functionality, magnitude, memory phenotypes, and underlying T cell receptor repertoires to infection. Vaccination after infection was able to further expand spike-specific responses. Some data might suggest that SARS-CoV-2 may reactivate cross-reactive memory CD8+ T cells from earlier episodes of particular common cold coronavirus infections. No significant difference in frequency, phenotype, or T cell receptor motifs in memory T cells generated by natural infection or vaccination was observed, suggesting that mRNA vaccines could be effective for boosting of pre-existing vaccine-induced immunity during revaccination without affecting established anti-spike T cell memory.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.07.12.21260227.

Somewhat relatedly (to the first study, at least) speculation (not a study; beware confounders) by some commentators in Israel (where 61% are fully vaccinated, 66% with at least one dose, all mRNA) that the most recent infection data might hint that recovery from previous infection is more protective against infection by delta (99% of sequenced cases; alpha 1%) than vaccination alone (9% of Israelis are convalescent yet constitute less than 1% of current cases; positivity rate for them is 0.1% compared to 1% amongst naive vaccinated).


----------



## 2hats (Jul 21, 2021)

Taiwan has approved Medigen's MVC-COV1901 prefusion stabilised, adjuvanted, protein subunit vaccine based on phase 1/2 immunogenicity data alone (the first time a covid vaccine has been approved without extensive phase 3 efficacy trials). Regulators approved the vaccine, for persons aged 20+ years, on the basis it is at least as immunogenic as AZD1222.








						Taiwan clears Medigen Covid-19 vaccine for emergency use
					

Antibodies created by candidate proven to be ‘no worse than’ those produced by AstraZeneca shot, with no major safety concerns, health ministry says.




					www.scmp.com
				



DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.100989.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 21, 2021)

From Argentina, a study of Sputnik V (a recombinant adenovirus, rAd26 and rAd5, vector vaccine) in both convalescent and infection naive individuals (289 healthcare workers).

By 21 days post first dose, 94% of naive participants developed spike-specific IgG antibodies, with 90% displaying neutralising capacity to early type. A single dose elicited higher antibody levels and virus neutralising capacity in convalescents than in two-dose naive individuals. The high seroconversion rate after a single dose in naive participants suggests a benefit of delaying second dose administration to increase the number of people vaccinated. There is no evident benefit of using a second dose in previously infected individuals
 
DOI: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2021.100359.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 22, 2021)

From Israel, further information regarding possible immunity (see also post 1399). Reportedly based on Ministry of Health internal documents, a suggestion that waning immunity in early BNT162b2 vaccinees _might_ be beginning to manifest. Persons vaccinated in January now appear to be 3-4 times more likely to become infected than those vaccinated in May. The effect appears to be stronger in older (60+) cohorts, but may be confounded by, for example, differing behaviour across age groups.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 22, 2021)

A test-negative case–control study led by PHE, to estimate the effectiveness of vaccination (BNT162b2 or AZD1222) against symptomatic disease caused by the delta/B.1.617.2 and alpha/B.1.1.7 variants (from over 19k cases, 22% delta).

Effectiveness after one dose of any vaccine was lower to delta, being 30.7%[95%CI:25.2-35.7], than to alpha at 48.7%[95%CI:45.5-51.7]. For two doses of BNT162b2 this effectiveness was 93.7%[95%CI:91.6-95.3] to alpha and 88.0%[95%CI:85.3-90.1] to delta. With two doses of AZD1222 the effectiveness was 74.5%[95%CI:68.4-79.4] to alpha and 67.0%[95%CI:61.3-71.8] to delta. Reductions from alpha to delta were modest.





DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2108891.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 22, 2021)

Further information from the Israeli Ministry of Health which both indicates a high recent efficacy of BNT162b2 to severe disease, hospitalisation and death during this (delta) wave, but also appears to suggest a reduction in efficacy to infection and symptoms.







To what degree this is perhaps waning circulating immunity, innate feature of the variant, biased by surge testing in particular areas/age groups, behaviour/testing/reporting related or, maybe, influenced by dosing interval is not yet clear.








						Israel reports COVID vaccine effectiveness against infection down to 40%; data might be skewed
					

***




					www.haaretz.com


----------



## 2hats (Jul 24, 2021)

As touched upon previously (and perhaps germane in the light of the above MoH data), intranasal SARS-CoV-2 vaccines - live attenuated for 2-49yrs, viral vector and maybe even mRNA formulations of such for others - might be a way forward for promoting longer-lived immunity, eliciting strong, enduring mucosal IgA, IgG, B and T cell responses which shut down initial upper respiratory infections early. Particularly where employed as a booster to an intramuscular prime.

A commentary piece on this: Scent of a vaccine | Science


> The ideal vaccination strategy may use an intramuscular vaccine to elicit a long-lived systemic IgG response and a broad repertoire of central memory B and T cells, followed by an intranasal booster that recruits memory B and T cells to the nasal passages and further guides their differentiation toward mucosal protection, including IgA secretion and tissue-resident memory cells in the respiratory tract.



See also:








						To Beat COVID, We May Need a Good Shot in the Nose
					

Intranasal vaccines might stop the spread of the coronavirus more effectively than needles in arms




					www.scientificamerican.com


----------



## elbows (Jul 27, 2021)

The Delta vaccines analysis from Israel sounds like it was faulty.


----------



## Supine (Jul 29, 2021)

Sounds like the politics of vaccines is taking its toll on AZ. For what it’s worth I hope they continue. Long term the cost and shipping conditions required really make their product worthwhile.









						EXCLUSIVE AstraZeneca exploring options for COVID-19 vaccine business - executive
					

AstraZeneca is exploring options for the future of its COVID-19 vaccine and expects greater clarity on the matter by the end of 2021, a senior executive said on Thursday, following a series of setbacks in its race to produce a shot for the world.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## elbows (Jul 29, 2021)

Politics have been a giant amplifier but arent the only factor.


----------



## elbows (Aug 4, 2021)

The latest REACT study show that their attempts to ascertain vaccine effectiveness via this studies methods results in a declining estimate compared to the previous round. I dont think this is unexpected really, vaccines are given a greater test during times of high prevalence, with Delta firmly dominant. I also note that the underlying number of cases used is rather modest.



			https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/bitstream/10044/1/90800/2/react1_r13_final_preprint_final.pdf
		




> At these ages, we compared swab-negatives with i) all swab-positives and ii) the subset of swab-positives who were symptomatic, that is reporting one or more classic COVID-19 symptoms in the month prior to testing (fever, loss or change of sense of smell or taste, new persistent cough). After adjusting for age, sex, region, ethnicity and index of multiple deprivation (IMD) [14], for all swab-positives, we estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) in round 12 of 64% (11%, 85%) and 49% (22%, 67%) in round 13. For those with symptoms we estimated VE of 83% (19%, 97%) in round 12 and 59% (23%, 78%) in round 13.





> In secondary analyses, for the 87% of participants aged 18 to 64 in round 13 who consented to data linkage (Methods), we estimated adjusted VE at 75% (35%, 90%) in round 12 and 62% (38%, 77%) in round 13. The apparent increase in VE for the linked participants reflected differences in odds of infection among the linked and unlinked groups (Table 5a), suggesting likely selection bias for consent to linkage. However, since the linked group had more reliable reported dates of vaccination, we examined the potential effect of a lag period of 14 days after the second vaccination and observed similar odds ratios for zero lag and 14 days lag following the second dose (Table 4).





> While vaccination was associated with lower prevalence of swab-positivity, there remained potential for large numbers of fully vaccinated people to become infected. During the period of round 12, we extrapolated from our data that 29% of infections in England occurred in double-vaccinated people, rising to 44% during the period of round 13. Also, although lower than for unvaccinated individuals, nearly one in 25 double-vaccinated individuals (3.84% [2.81%, 5.21%]) tested swab-positive if they reported contact with a known COVID-19 case (Table 6).


----------



## elbows (Aug 4, 2021)

An example of someone misjudging their personal risk and paying the ultimate price.









						Fitness enthusiast, 42, who rejected vaccine, dies of Covid
					

John Eyers had been climbing mountains four weeks before his death in intensive care




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## elbows (Aug 6, 2021)

Latest PHE technical report on variances implies little difference in viral loads between unvaccinated and vaccinated people who catch the virus.



> PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values from routinely undertaken tests in England show that Ct values (and by inference viral load) are similar between individuals who are unvaccinated and vaccinated.





> In the NHS Test and Trace (NHSTT) case data, the mean and median lowest Ct values for all cases with Delta, where Ct data are available, since the 14 June 2021 are similar, with a median of 17.8 for unvaccinated and 18.0 for those with 2 vaccine doses (Figure 12). This means that whilst vaccination may reduce an individual’s overall risk of becoming infected, once they are infected there is limited difference in viral load (and Ct values) between those who are vaccinated and unvaccinated. Given they have similar Ct values, this suggests limited difference in infectiousness. To note, this analysis is undertaken on case data and are not age-stratified. Findings can be influenced by test-seeking behaviour, as well as true changes in the data, for example the age distribution of cases, which can also influence Ct values.





			https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1009243/Technical_Briefing_20.pdf
		


Since this is part of Delta analysis it was debatable whether I should put this info in the variants thread or the vaccine thread.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 7, 2021)

There was a generally sensible guy on a forum this morning saying he was resisting vaccination because he was hypertensive ..

I can't find any indication that people taking ACE2 inhibitors would be adversely affected by a vaccine based on the COVID spike ... when I asked him whether he thought an actual covid infection might not be worse, he accused me of strawmanning. his argument was that if this became several shots a year and steadily tweaked spike mimicking eventually it would take its toll ...

I can't find any references beyond the early 2020 reports about ACE2 inhibitors ...


----------



## ska invita (Aug 7, 2021)

gentlegreen said:


> There was a generally sensible guy on a forum this morning saying he was resisting vaccination because he was hypertensive ..


what would happen if he took it?
unless he has had a doctor saying Dont Take It it sounds like personalised imagined nonsense to me

the vaccine knocked me out both times - literally on the floor the second time - still would take it again though


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 7, 2021)

ska invita said:


> what would happen if he took it?
> unless he has had a doctor saying Dont Take It it sounds like personalised imagined nonsense to me
> 
> the vaccine knocked me out both times - literally on the floor the second time - still would take it again though


he claims to have two doctors as parents ... he said he's holding out until he needs vaccinations to work ...

I had an interesting time with my first dose of the AZ and ditto - but I have no underlying comorbidities - except age - though my father apparently had angina at a young age according to my mother ...


----------



## LDC (Aug 7, 2021)

gentlegreen said:


> There was a generally sensible guy on a forum this morning saying he was resisting vaccination because he was hypertensive ..
> 
> I can't find any indication that people taking ACE2 inhibitors would be adversely affected by a vaccine based on the COVID spike ... when I asked him whether he thought an actual covid infection might not be worse, he accused me of strawmanning. his argument was that if this became several shots a year and steadily tweaked spike mimicking eventually it would take its toll ...
> 
> I can't find any references beyond the early 2020 reports about ACE2 inhibitors ...



He's just talking shit. Hence why people with hypertension (high blood pressure) aren't being told to not have the vaccine.


----------



## 2hats (Aug 7, 2021)

First published, fully refereed Com-COV results, comparing heterologous and homologous prime-boost schedules, led by the UK Vaccine Task Force/NIHR, supporting the use of heterologous prime-boost ChAd/BNT schedules.


> Despite the BNT/ChAd regimen not meeting non-inferiority criteria, the SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG concentrations of both heterologous schedules were higher than that of a licensed vaccine schedule (ChAd/ChAd) with proven efficacy against COVID-19 disease and hospitalisation. Along with the higher immunogenicity of ChAd/BNT compared with ChAd/ChAd, these data support flexibility in the use of heterologous prime-boost vaccination using ChAd and BNT COVID-19 vaccines.







DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01694-9.


----------



## 2hats (Aug 7, 2021)

Novavax have submitted Emergency Use Authorisation filings, for their protein subunit vaccine NVX-CoV2373 (manufactured at the Serum Institute of India), with regulators in India, Indonesia and the Philippines. They will also make a submission for an Emergency Use Listing with the WHO this month (enables exports from SII to COVAX participants).

They are still planning to complete their submission to the MHRA in September, followed by their rolling submission for the EMA, then submissions to Australian, Canadian and NZ regulatory bodies. FDA submission is expected in the fourth quarter.

Separately, they report on data for a third NVX-CoV2373 booster dose at 6 months (post second dose) increasing neutralising antibodies over 4-fold for wild-type compared to the original regimen. Additionally, cross-reactive antibodies to delta/B.1.617.2 were more than 6-fold over the original regimen. Similarly, cross-reactive antibodies to other variants - alpha/B.1.1.7 and beta/B.1.351 - also increased several-fold. Notably, older recipients (60-84 years) benefited greatly.


----------



## 2hats (Aug 10, 2021)

A couple of studies involving the single dose J&J/Janssen viral vector vaccine, Ad26.COV2.S.

First the Sisonke study (470+k healthcare workers, South Africa) where it reportedly provided for around 93% protection from death and roughly 71% protection from hospitalisation due to delta/B.1.617.2, and 67% to beta/B.1.351. Protection against hospitalisation was sustained to ~65% after 4 months.




Notably the figure for delta is similar to the degree of protection a single dose of AZD1222 appears to confer. This might suggest it would not be unreasonable to offer single dose Ad26.COV2.S recipients the option of a (perhaps mRNA) booster.

Indeed a separate study (29 persons controlled for age, clinical co-morbidity, history of pre-vaccination infection, NYU), comparing convalescent, BNT162b2, mRNA-1273 and Ad26.COV2.S sera, suggests the latter elicits lower neutralising titres to beta/B.1.351, delta/B.1.617.2 and lambda/C.37, compared to mRNA vaccines. The authors suggest a second immunisation might be warranted (see also - high immune responses in earlier mixed ChAd/BNT162b2 studies, posts #1383 and #1429).

DOI: 10.1101/2021.07.19.452771.


----------



## 2hats (Aug 10, 2021)

2hats said:


> The Israeli Health Minister has already acted on this, likely due to recent growth of delta, and has directed that adults with impaired immune systems, who had received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine, will be offered a booster shot immediately.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Some early data from Israel concerning a third dose booster. One should bear in mind that key confounders, such as behaviour, are not controlled for and some dispute the analysis and interpretation.

Here cases per 100k in the 60+ cohort (over 600k recipients to date) where red are unvaccinated, green fully vaccinated (2 dose), purple boosted (3 dose):


----------



## 2hats (Aug 11, 2021)

Codagenix's intranasal live attenuated COVID-19 vaccine, COVI-VAC. Here SARS-CoV-2 is attenuated by de-optimising 283 point mutation locations and deleting the furin cleavage site from the viral genome. In this animal model study the vaccine demonstrated significant immunogenic effect equivalent to convalescent immune response.
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2102775118.

A phase 1 clinical trial is underway (48 participants) which should report on safety and immunogenicity within the next couple of months.








						Intranasal COVID-19 vaccine demonstrates single-dose efficacy in preclinical studies, in parallel with achievement of Phase 1 clinical milestone
					

/PRNewswire/ -- Codagenix Inc., a clinical-stage synthetic biology company pioneering a novel platform for vaccines and oncolytic virus therapies, today...




					www.prnewswire.com


----------



## 2hats (Aug 14, 2021)

Another mix and match study, this time from Charité Berlin. Here an assessment of reactogenicity and immunogenicity amongst (380) healthcare workers vaccinated with one of or a mix of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCov-19 (AZD1222), with assays investigating IgG antibody titres and T-cell reactivity.




The heterologous vaccination regimen presented here (10-12 week dosing interval) was well tolerated and provided for improved immunogenicity compared with homologous AZD1222 vaccination (10-12 week dosing interval) and homologous BNT162b2 vaccination (3 week dosing interval). The longer dosing interval appeared to provide for less adverse reactions than that seen in previous heterologous studies (DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01115-6) where the dosing interval was 28 days.
DOI: 10.1016/S2213-2600(21)00357-X.


----------



## 2hats (Aug 14, 2021)

Briefly, several preprints of studies that might hint towards some degree of longitudinal waning of circulating humoral immunity, and thus efficacy to any infection (though there could be other confounders related to variant type, behaviours, etc). Note that efficacy to severe infection, hospitalisation and death holds up well. mRNA-1273 might wane slightly less gradually than BNT162b2 (though confounders: tends to have been deployed later and dosing is higher).

From Israel (Leumit Health Services) a retrospective cohort study of fully vaccinated adults (~34K, 49% female, mean age 47 years, previously infected excluded), RT-PCR tested at least 2 weeks post second dose. A higher rate of positive results were seen in those at 5+ months post second dose, particularly in the 60+ years cohort.

DOI: 10.1101/2021.08.03.21261496.

A group preprint (BioNTech, Pfizer and others) from their placebo-controlled, observer-blinded, multinational, pivotal efficacy study (46k+ participants, including 2k+ 12-15 years) of persons receiving the standard BNT162b2 regimen. Over 6 months a gradual declining trend in vaccine efficacy was observed, though the vaccine was still highly efficacious.

DOI: 10.1101/2021.07.28.21261159.

From Qatar (various) a matched test-negative, case-control study design assessing BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 (standard dosing regimens). BNT162b2 efficacy against any delta/B.1.617.2 infection was 64.2% (95%CI:38.1-80.1%) from two weeks post first dose and before the second dose, dropping to 53.5% (95%CI:43.9-61.4%) from two weeks after the second dose (most infections serval months after full vaccination). mRNA-1273 equivalent numbers were 79.0% (95%CI:58.9-90.1%) and 84.8% (95%CI:75.9-90.8%), respectively. Importantly, effectiveness against any severe (or worse) covid due to delta, two weeks or more after second dose, was 89.7% (95%CI:61.0-98.1%) for BNT162b2 and 100.0% (95%CI:41.2-100.0%) for mRNA-1273 (100% to fatalities for both).
DOI: 10.1101/2021.08.11.21261885.

A retrospective, matched cohort study (Mayo Clinic, US) of (179+k) recipients of mRNA vaccines with unvaccinated persons, comparing efficacies in periods January-July and July alone. In the first period efficacy to infection was 86% (95%CI:81-90.6%) for mRNA-1273, and 76% (95%CI:69-81%) for BNT162b2. In comparison, in July this was measured as 76% (95%CI:58-87%) and 42% (95%CI:13-62%) respectively. For hospitalisation the numbers were 91.6% (95%CI:81-97%), 85% (95%CI:73-93%), dropping slightly to 81% (95%CI:33-96.3%), 75% (95%CI:24-93.9%).
  
DOI: 10.1101/2021.08.06.21261707.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Aug 20, 2021)

UK regulator approves ‘first of its kind’ Covid antibody treatment
					

Sajid Javid says green light for Ronapreve – which was used to treat Donald Trump – is ‘fantastic news’




					www.theguardian.com
				




Sounds promising.


----------



## 2hats (Aug 20, 2021)

Even better, an antibody prophylaxis, administered by intramuscular injection, offering up to 12 months of protection, perhaps ideal for those with immune dysfunction who might seroconvert poorly after vaccination.

AZD7442, a combination of two long-acting antibodies (tixagevimab, AZD8895, and cilgavimab, AZD1061), developed from B cells from convalescent patients, was found to reduce the risk of developing symptomatic COVID-19 by 77% (95%CI:46-90) compared to placebo in this phase 3 trial. The trial accrued 25 cases of symptomatic COVID-19 at the primary analysis, with no cases of severe COVID-19 or COVID-19-related death in the AZD7442 arm, whilst there were three cases of severe COVID-19, which included two deaths, in the placebo arm.




__





						AZD7442 PROVENT Phase III prophylaxis trial met primary endpoint in preventing COVID-19
					






					www.astrazeneca.com


----------



## elbows (Aug 20, 2021)

Given that when I read technical papers about variants, one of the things on their future concern radars is single antibody treatments potential to encourage escape mutants. So I'm pleased that both of the treatments mentioned above seem to involve two antibodies rather than one.

I dont know very much about the subject though, is a combination of two antibodies enough for me to be far more relaxed about this aspect, or would a combination of even more be more prudent?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 21, 2021)

I expect there's some stuff in this article that not everyone will agree with.









						Covid: What’s the best way to top up our immunity?
					

Now we have some protection, do we need to keep boosting or can nature take its course?



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## zahir (Aug 21, 2021)

Indeed. The BBC promoting disease and disability.


----------



## Badgers (Aug 21, 2021)

teuchter said:


> I expect there's some stuff in this article that not everyone will agree with.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Fucking idiots


----------



## zahir (Aug 21, 2021)

Also this thread


----------



## elbows (Aug 21, 2021)

teuchter said:


> I expect there's some stuff in this article that not everyone will agree with.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What do you think about it?

I think its a typical mix of reasonable points and details, but with shitty framing sponsored by the approach this government already decided to take long ago.

Bits I agree with include that I dont think the easy to detect antibodies should be used as a complete guide, and I dont want us to be locked into a cycle of boosters when there are still so many completely unvaccinated people in the world.

Problems include how you establish whether boosters are necessary without doing so via masses real world data that inevitably involves putting people in harms way.

The worst thing about the article and some of the comments by professor Riley is that in order to write such an article, look at what is left out. We are invited to think of a picture where a year ago catching covid for the first time could be deadly, as if that is somehow not the case at all these days. They arent exactly drawing attention to the current hospitalisation and death rate. And the idea of actually trying to keep the number of new infections down is absent, just like its absent from current government policy.

There are rationales baked into this sort of thinking which do make some more sense in the long term. ie as people think of how some viruses transition from having the potential to cause a bad pandemic, to something that is still a killer at times but in other ways is very much something lots of people learn to live with. There is a sense of inevitability to some of that, but I really question the timing of a push towards such a way of thinking in the UK - its hugely premature to say the very least. And very large questions remain in regards whether going in hard and narrow in this way will actually get us to the promised land sooner than would otherwise have been the case, or whether it totally blows up in our face and sets the whole schedule back.


----------



## elbows (Aug 21, 2021)

And Riley can absolutely fuck off when it comes to this:



> She said: "We really need to consider, are we just frightening people rather than giving them the confidence to get on with their lives? We're close to just worrying people now."



Oh we are close to that are we? Fuck off, people arent stupid enough to fall for this unless their agenda already points in that direction. Because those who are not so inclined are more than capable of seeing the hospitalisation figures for themselves and reaching their own conclusions. Which is probably why some of the fuckers with this agenda would like to see some of the daily data fade out, dont worry people with actual data and the full picture, suppress it!

Personally when it comes to how I think about the appropriateness of my own messages of concern and whether the 'frightening people' thing is really so undesirable, comes down to things like what the actual hospitalisation figures look like, and whether we are at a stage where we actually need the fears of the population to stay in place in order to moderate behaviour and thus stand a chance of coping with a particular wave.

And since it is currently unclear to me how much behavioural changes of the masses may be required in order to get us through the coming autumn and winter, there is no way I would want to start putting such 'relax and dont be afraid' ideas in peoples heads at this particular stage. Which also means that I will seriously question the agenda of anyone pushing hard to rush, rush, rush back to a sense of normality, free from fear. Not to mention that a fear-free agenda is a delicate matter, if you push for it too hard and fast then you run the risk of achieving the very opposite effect should the shit hit the fan again in the coming months, and articles like that one will seem even more ludicrous than they do today.

If the UK had been able to stick to its original plan a in the first place, rather than u-turning mid-march 2020, I'm sure we would have been treated to and endless stream of such justifications and framing all the way through the pandemic. There would have been no shortage of experts ready to come out with this shit, dressed up in reasonable, rational terms, but no less deadly and absurd. Not that the pandemic makes me think any less of such experts because I was already well aware of where their sense of balance and ability to justify the unjustifiable can lead, long before this pandemic arrived.


----------



## elbows (Aug 21, 2021)

So to be clear, I suppose as the pandemic progresses I eventually expect to have far more in common with such stances than I do today. But timing is critical, and I dont have much respect for those who wish to rush off in that direction right now. I will be sure to declare when I think a time thats appropriate for that sort of thinking has actually arrived.


----------



## MrCurry (Aug 21, 2021)

I can‘t begin to match you for your solid grip of the details elbows so I won’t even try to comment on those, but my observation is I wonder how such an article comes about. I mean who whispered into the editorial leadership‘s ear to lead to the journalist being tasked with putting this whole piece together?

I wouldn’t be surprised if it is a sign of the path the U.K. will be taking, opening up more and more agressively and early compared to others in search of a competitive edge in global markets. All backed up by suitable advice from tame scientific advisors and media articles such as this one to set the stage.

I wouldn’t want to be a member of a risk group living in the U.K. with the current govt at the helm.


----------



## elbows (Aug 21, 2021)

Well a chunk of it is typical stuff as described by the likes of Chomsky - those with suitable attributes fill those sorts of jobs. In a world where pliable & compliant candidates are deemed the best for the job, this is what we get, by design. People trained to sell a line and fall into line at the right time.

There are some limits to that though, as demonstrated during March 2020. Even then the state broadcaster and a whole bunch of others were ready to sell plan a to us, no matter how much of a stretch that task was. But some other journalists were not convinced and actually managed to ask a few of the right questions during crucial press conferences on a very important week in March 2020. In great part because they saw what most other nations were doing, and we were so obviously out of line with our response and plan. That was a chaotic time with much confusion within the establishment, and boat rocking and the media somewhat living up to the myths of the noble journalist are more likely to occur, briefly, on such occasions. I recall for example that there was a stage during the buildup to the Iraq war when even the BBC called some of our sides propaganda propaganda, and I attribute much of the noise and dissent of that period to the fact there was a split within the establishment.

As for experts, advisors and professionals willing to share their thoughts with the media, its partly a similar story in terms of personnel. But its also a simple case of there being enough diversity of expert opinion on every detail that its usually not hard to find someone prepared to say something that can be used to serve a particular agenda.

The UK has signalled its intent to tread that path for a very long time now, they never wanted to take an alternative approach in the first place and they do not disguise their ambition to get back to it as soon as possible. So far they've always tried it when it was doomed to fail as the agenda was incompatible with reality and hospital capacity. The vaccine era encourages them to push their luck still further.  They've had some victories already this summer, but it remains for me too early to tell if the gains they have made will actually hold in the coming months, or whether this approach is still unsustainable.


----------



## 2hats (Aug 24, 2021)

Pfizer/BioNTech phase 2 trial (reactogenicity and immunogenicity) of monovalent BNT162b2 (B.1.1.7) and BNT162b2 (B.1.617.2), and multivalent BNT162b2 (B.1.1.7 + B.1.617.2) vaccines (alpha and delta spikes) begins this month. First results due early 2022.


----------



## 2hats (Aug 24, 2021)

Valneva (whole virus, inactivated vaccine) have started a rolling submission with the MHRA in the UK, aiming to be granted approval before the end of the year when Cov-Compare phase 3 trial results should be available, assuming those data, and MHRA review, are favourable.
Valneva Commences Rolling Submission to MHRA for its Inactivated, Adjuvanted COVID-19 Vaccine – Valneva


----------



## 2hats (Aug 24, 2021)

A phase 1, non-randomised dose escalation study (15 healthy volunteers, 30-55 years, previously vaccinated with intramuscular AZD1222), to be conducted in the UK (Oxford/Imperial), with AstraZeneca AZD1222 (ChAdOx1) administered as an aerosol via nebuliser directly to the respiratory tract. Aims are to determine safety, reactogenicity and immunogenicity, delivering first results in mid-2022. This trial is investigating the potential for producing a needle-free, viral vector based, booster option, better targeted at respiratory mucosal surfaces where infection first takes hold.


----------



## Riklet (Aug 24, 2021)

Whats happening with Novavax? Aside from all the moaning cunts on the trial bitching about how they can't go on holiday....


----------



## 2hats (Aug 24, 2021)

Riklet said:


> Whats happening with Novavax? Aside from all the moaning cunts on the trial bitching about how they can't go on holiday....


See post #1430. Still on course to file for approval with the MHRA next month, EMA (EU) in October (as best I know right now).


----------



## 2hats (Aug 25, 2021)

Following publication of interim immunogenicity data from phase 1/2a studies of earlier vaccinees, J&J recommend a booster shot after several months for recipients of their "single dose" viral vector vaccine, Ad26.COV2.S.








						Johnson & Johnson Announces Data to Support Boosting its Single-Shot COVID-19 Vaccine | Johnson & Johnson
					

Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine booster, after single dose primary regimen, provided rapid and robust increase in spike-binding antibodiesNew studies build on data demonstrating strong durability through eight months after immunization




					www.jnj.com


----------



## 2hats (Aug 27, 2021)

2hats said:


> Following publication of interim immunogenicity data from phase 1/2a studies of earlier vaccinees, J&J recommend a booster shot after several months for recipients of their "single dose" viral vector vaccine, Ad26.COV2.S.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Preprint of relevant study - DOI: 10.1101/2021.08.25.21262569.


----------



## 2hats (Aug 27, 2021)

Chongqing Zhifei Biological Products' protein subunit vaccine, ZF2001 (a 3 dose regimen over 8 weeks, already approved for use in China), reported here to have achieved a 81.76% efficacy rate against COVID-19 (any severity) in a phase 3 trial (>28k participants), with 100% efficacy to severe cases and death. Also reported to have 77.54% efficacy against delta/B.1.617.2 (precise nature of efficacy not defined). No preprint yet available.








						China's Zhifei says unit's COVID shot shows 81.76% efficacy in late-stage trial
					

A COVID-19 vaccine developed by a unit of China's Chongqing Zhifei Biological Products (Zhifei) (300122.SZ) showed an 81.76% efficacy rate against COVID-19 cases of any degree of severity in a large, late-stage trial, Zhifei said on Friday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 27, 2021)

2hats said:


> Following publication of interim immunogenicity data from phase 1/2a studies of earlier vaccinees, J&J recommend a booster shot after several months for recipients of their "single dose" viral vector vaccine, Ad26.COV2.S.


I always though the "single dose" thing was a bit iffy with most of the others being two doses ...


----------



## 2hats (Aug 27, 2021)

Repeated exposure to the same, or better, slight variations on the same antigen over reasonably long intervals not unsurprisingly improves affinity maturation through somatic hypermutation and perhaps even class switching recombination.

Somewhat underlining this, a preprint from Israel (Maccabi) for a retrospective cohort study that appears to demonstrate "that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalisation caused by the delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity. Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant."
DOI: 10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415.

More:




__





						Science | AAAS
					






					www.sciencemag.org
				




See also J&J Ad26.COV2.S late boosting (DOI: 10.1101/2021.08.25.21262569) and a Canadian (UHN) study on delaying BNT162b2 second dose (DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-793234/v1).


----------



## 2hats (Aug 27, 2021)

From Germany (Charite, Berlin) interim results of a prospective cohort study comparing immune responses in a cohort of vaccinated elderly persons (ages 78-87) to those in younger healthcare workers (ages 30-48), HCW (both up to six months after administration of BNT162b2).

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1-, full spike- and RBD -IgG seropositivity rates and IgG levels were significantly lower in the elderly cohort, with around 60% producing sera that could neutralise delta/B.1.617.2, compared to over 95% of the healthcare workers. Similarly a reduction in SARS-CoV-2-S1 T cell reactivity of around 5-fold was observed.

This suggests that the standard two-dose BNT162b2 vaccination regimen elicits less durable immune responses in the elderly compared to young adults, and may support booster vaccinations of such a cohort.

DOI: 10.1101/2021.08.26.21262468.


----------



## 2hats (Sep 6, 2021)

Indian Cadila Healthcare's DNA-plasmid (encodes spike) based COVID-19 vaccine, ZyCoV-D (three dose regimen delivered intradermally; storable at 2-8C), has been approved by the Indian regulator, DCGI, for use in 12 year olds and up. In phase III trials (28k participants) it is reported to have demonstrated 66.6% efficacy to symptomatic infection (delta/B.1.617.2 dominated at the time of the trial). Furthermore, no cases of moderate disease, or worse, where reported during the trial.

This is the first regulatory body approval of any DNA vaccine anywhere in the world. This platform may open the door for a range of anti-cancer vaccines.


----------



## 2hats (Sep 6, 2021)

Moderna are seeking approval from the FDA for a half dose (50μg) mRNA-1273 third-dose (6 month post-dose-2) booster:




__





						Moderna Announces Submission of Initial Data to U.S. FDA for Its COVID-19 Vaccine Booster | Moderna, Inc.
					

mRNA-1273 at 50 µg dose level induced robust antibody responses of more than 40x against the Delta variant (B.1.617.2) CAMBRIDGE, Mass. --(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sep. 1, 2021-- Moderna, Inc. (Nasdaq:MRNA), a biotechnology company pioneering messenger RNA (mRNA) therapeutics and vaccines, today announced




					investors.modernatx.com
				



Also from the EMA and other regulatory bodies in coming days...








						Moderna seeks EU authorization for COVID-19 vaccine booster dose
					

Moderna Inc said on Friday it had asked the EU drugs regulator for conditional approval of a booster shot of its COVID-19 vaccine at a 50 microgram dose.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Voley (Sep 7, 2021)

I prefer the new lateral flow tests that I've just got.

You just do your nostrils with these ones.  Much better imo. I kept irritating my tonsils with the previous ones and thinking I'd got a sore throat /Covid.

They're quicker at just 15 minutes too. Badgers are these the ones you're getting better accuracy with?


----------



## 2hats (Sep 7, 2021)

EMA evaluating BNT162b2 third-dose boosters (at six months post-second-dose) for healthy and immunocompromised individuals.




__





						EMA evaluating data on booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine Comirnaty - European Medicines Agency
					

EMA evaluating data on booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine Comirnaty




					www.ema.europa.eu


----------



## Badgers (Sep 7, 2021)

Voley said:


> I prefer the new lateral flow tests that I've just got.
> 
> You just do your nostrils with these ones.  Much better imo. I kept irritating my tonsils with the previous ones and thinking I'd got a sore throat /Covid.
> 
> They're quicker at just 15 minutes too. Badgers are these the ones you're getting better accuracy with?


They are an improvement. The main issue with accuracy is that people did not do them properly. I can see why as they are not very pleasant  currently I do around 10-12 a week and still dislike them. 

The LFT is not really any different from the PCR test. Like anything you just have to do it properly.


----------



## Voley (Sep 7, 2021)

Badgers said:


> They are an improvement. The main issue with accuracy is that people did not do them properly. I can see why as they are not very pleasant  currently I do around 10-12 a week and still dislike them.
> 
> The LFT is not really any different from the PCR test. Like anything you just have to do it properly.


I think these will be easier for people to do right. The throat bit was the worst bit with the others I thought.


----------



## Badgers (Sep 7, 2021)

Voley said:


> I think these will be easier for people to do right. The throat bit was the worst bit with the others I thought.


As an estimate around 70% of people hate the throat swab but around 30% think the nose is the worst part of it.


We have to enforce it more often than not. The below is slightly overkill but people should be SURE their results are accurate, even it is uncomfortable for 20 seconds. 



> Swab the left of your throat for 5 seconds then 5 seconds on the right.
> 
> Swab your nose deeply for 5 seconds then press the swab against the side for 5 seconds.



Most of us have done a 'quick swab' rather than deal with it. I don't really blame them but it causes inaccuracies in the results which people are keen to blame on the test kit.


----------



## two sheds (Sep 7, 2021)

As I recall the video (which I followed) recommended a shorter time than the written instructions for the nose swab (which I came to afterwards). I did find the nose swab easier though.


----------



## Badgers (Sep 7, 2021)

two sheds said:


> As I recall the video (which I followed) recommended a shorter time than the written instructions for the nose swab (which I came to afterwards). I did find the nose swab easier though.


Like I said the official guidelines I posted above are overkill. However if you are going to be uncomfortable for 2-3 seconds then why not just be sure? 

It is uncomfortable but might as well do it properly rather than blame the tools when you catch/spread it.


----------



## Supine (Sep 9, 2021)

Treble mega vax being developed


----------



## 2hats (Sep 9, 2021)

Slovakia to offer BNT162b2 at one-third standard dose to children 5-11 years.








						Vaccination against Covid open for children older than five in Slovakia
					

Paediatricians will assess cases individually.




					spectator.sme.sk


----------



## 2hats (Sep 9, 2021)

Supine said:


> Treble mega vax being developed



Amongst a slew of new mRNA vaccines, Moderna are just embarking on a phase 1 trial of a next generation COVID-19 vaccine, mRNA-1283, that encodes for epitopes in both spike receptor binding and N-terminal domains (RBD and NTD), which should hopefully be more effective across a range of variants.


----------



## 2hats (Sep 9, 2021)

On flu and SARS-CoV-2 combinations, with a view to offering them as a yearly booster...

Moderna's combination vaccine, mRNA-1073, encodes for both the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and the influenza hemagglutinin (HA) glycoproteins. They hope to carry out a study in the next 6-12 months.








						Moderna shares rise after company reveals single-shot vaccine booster for Covid and flu
					

Moderna is developing a single-dose vaccine that combines the company's Covid vaccine and a flu booster.




					www.cnbc.com
				



Meanwhile, Novavax has started a phase 1/2 study of their combined NVX-CoV2373 protein subunit vaccine, targeting SARS-CoV-2, and quadrivalent recombinant hemagglutinin protein nanoparticle influenza vaccine.








						Novavax begins early-stage trial for combined influenza/COVID-19 vaccine
					

Vaccine developer Novavax Inc said on Wednesday it has initiated an early-stage study to test its combined flu and COVID-19 vaccine.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Sep 10, 2021)

Later this month BioNTech will publish results of BNT162b2 trials in 5-11 year olds and seek approval for such use from multiple regulators. They are in the process of bottling a lower-dose pediatric version. Regulatory approval for younger children will be sought later this year.








						BioNTech to seek approval soon for vaccine for 5-11 year olds-Spiegel
					

BioNTech (22UAy.DE) is set to request approval across the globe to use its COVID-19 vaccine in children as young as five over the next few weeks and preparations for a launch are on track, the biotech firm's two top executives told Der Spiegel.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Sep 10, 2021)

From France/Argentina (Sorbonne/Cordoba) a thermostable (at room temperature) oral eVLP (enveloped virus-like particle) vaccine, expressing SARS-CoV-2 spike and membrane proteins, which appears to induce high levels of mucosal IgA and IgG in hamster and mice models, particularly when used as a booster following an initial intramuscular prime dose.
 
DOI: 10.1101/2021.09.09.459634.


----------



## 2hats (Sep 11, 2021)

2hats said:


> *Later this month BioNTech will publish results of BNT162b2 trials in 5-11 year olds and seek approval for such use from multiple regulators.* They are in the process of bottling a lower-dose pediatric version. Regulatory approval for younger children will be sought later this year.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Apparently FDA approval for this could be granted before the end of October.








						U.S. could authorize Pfizer COVID-19 shot for kids age 5-11 in October -sources
					

Top U.S. health officials believe that Pfizer Inc's COVID-19 vaccine could be authorized for children aged 5-11 years old by the end of October, two sources familiar with the situation said on Friday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Sep 13, 2021)

UK government terminates vaccine supply agreement with Valneva for VLA2001 claiming breach of obligations under said agreement. Valneva continuing with production and trials. Further phase 3 study results expected next month and the company still intends to seek regulatory approval from the MHRA later this year.




__





						Valneva Receives Notice of Termination of COVID-19 Vaccine Supply Agreement by UK Government - Valneva
					

Saint-Herblain (France), September 13, 2021 – Valneva SE, a specialty vaccine company, today announced that it has received a termination notice from the UK Government (“HMG”) in relation to the Supply Agreement for its COVID-19 vaccine candidate, VLA2001. The contract provides HMG with the...




					valneva.com


----------



## elbows (Sep 13, 2021)

I havent read any speculation about what exactly the breach was, or whether there were alternative motivations at work that made the UK reach for the get-out clause. Any ideas?


----------



## 2hats (Sep 13, 2021)

elbows said:


> I haent read any speculation about what exactly the breach was, or whether there were alternative motivations at work that made the UK reach for the get-out clause. Any ideas?


Perhaps they've realised that an incompetent intern contaminated the entire production run earlier this year?


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 13, 2021)

2hats said:


> Perhaps they've realised that an incompetent intern contaminated the entire production run earlier this year?


You can see her fighting the urge to bop him on the head.


----------



## platinumsage (Sep 14, 2021)

elbows said:


> I havent read any speculation about what exactly the breach was, or whether there were alternative motivations at work that made the UK reach for the get-out clause. Any ideas?



Javid just said "...it was clear to us that the vaccine in question that the company was developing would not get approval by the MHRA here in the UK."









						UK would not have approved Valneva COVID vaccine, health secretary says
					

Britain cancelled its contract for about 100 million doses of a COVID-19 vaccine being developed by France's Valneva in part because it was clear it would not be approved for use in the country, UK Health Secretary Sajid Javid said on Tuesday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 14, 2021)

Whole inactivated virus with extra spike ...


----------



## Supine (Sep 14, 2021)

elbows said:


> I havent read any speculation about what exactly the breach was, or whether there were alternative motivations at work that made the UK reach for the get-out clause. Any ideas?



I smell a stitch up if they are saying mhra wouldn’t approve, as I’d be surprised if the mhra would tell them that before trial results are released.


----------



## elbows (Sep 14, 2021)

Supine said:


> I smell a stitch up if they are saying mhra wouldn’t approve, as I’d be surprised if the mhra would tell them that before trial results are released.



If there was a large, specific and undeniable fly in the ointment then I suppose I could well believe informal discussions about the inevitable implications may have been discussed. But I wouldnt like to bet either way without knowing the key detail in full.


----------



## Supine (Sep 14, 2021)

I’ll be asking a friend at the mhra tomorrow!


----------



## 2hats (Sep 15, 2021)

Supine said:


> I smell a stitch up if they are saying mhra wouldn’t approve, as I’d be surprised if the mhra would tell them that before trial results are released.


Might have access to as yet unpublished data from COV-Boost maybe, but not the Valneva clinical trial study?


(AF the PI there (VLA), as well as sitting on the JCVI).

FT claims sources suggest COV-Boost indicates it performed 'less well' than other vaccines, but no clarification beyond that.


Spoiler: UK cancels €1.4bn Covid vaccine deal with France’s Valneva



The UK has terminated a €1.4bn agreement with French biotech Valneva for the supply of at least 100m doses of a Covid-19 vaccine, saying the group was in breach of its obligations under the deal.
Manufacture of the vaccine, which is in late-stage trials and still awaiting regulatory approval, was planned to take place in Scotland and deliveries were set to start next year.
The disclosure of the termination by Valneva sent shares in the Paris-listed company down by 42 per cent on Monday. The group added that it “strenuously” denied breaching its obligations, but declined to comment further.
The vaccine performed less well than rivals in a recent UK trial, named Cov-Boost, that explored the effectiveness of various potential booster jabs, according to people familiar with the results, which are yet to be published. Valneva did not respond to a request for comment.
Competition for vaccines has proved politically explosive, with the EU this month settling an acrimonious dispute with AstraZeneca over delayed supplies. The French government came under fire last year when the UK first struck a supply deal with Valneva.
Downing Street said on Monday that the dispute with Valneva was an “ongoing commercial issue”.
The government had announced in August last year that it was investing a multimillion-pound sum in Valneva’s manufacturing plant in Livingston, Scotland, supporting 100 skilled jobs. At the time, Kwasi Kwarteng, the business secretary, hailed the plant as a potential “vaccine production powerhouse”.
The termination comes as the UK prepares to become the first big country to administer mix and match” coronavirus vaccines for its booster programme.
Results of Valneva’s late-stage trials are expected in the fourth quarter, with UK approval possible before the end of the year, the company said.
Given the timeline, it is unlikely the shot would have played an immediate role in the booster campaign in which patients will be given a third shot that is different from the two they received earlier in the vaccination drive.
“The MHRA (regulator) has not approved the vaccine,” Downing Street said. “It does not form any part of our vaccine rollout in autumn and winter.”
Humza Yousaf, the SNP health secretary for Scotland, told the BBC that the cancellation of the contract was a “blow for the facility in Livingston”.
“We are very keen and will be reaching out to the company to try to get security and secure a future for that facility in Livingston,” he said.
Headquartered outside the French city of Nantes, Valneva is not a newcomer to vaccines. Its jabs for cholera and Japanese encephalitis have received approval from regulators either in the US or EU, and it has several others under development.
The company had warned in April that exporting vaccines between the EU and the UK could be a “substantial risk” to its operations. Although the vaccine was due to be manufactured in Scotland, the company said it would be put into vials and packaged in the EU.
Its vaccine candidate uses a whole inactivated virus to elicit an immune response against coronavirus, a technique that can prolong the manufacturing process but provides greater coverage against all variants. Most other shots are designed to target the spike protein of the virus.
Addressing the termination, Valneva said it had worked “tirelessly, and to its best efforts” on its collaboration with the UK, adding that it would “increase its efforts with other potential customers to ensure that its inactivated vaccine can be used in the fight against the pandemic”.
In late August, a French official said the country still planned to use Valneva’s vaccine as part of its autumn booster campaign, if the company secured European regulatory approval.
It is unclear if those plans have since changed, and France has let the company negotiate its potential contract with the EU instead of directly with France.
“We are one of the countries who have signalled interest in the Valneva vaccine, but we are prioritising a collective approach,” said a French government spokesman on Monday.
Frédérique Vidal, France’s minister in charge of higher education, research and innovation, declined to comment on the UK’s decision.
“Discussions are still under way with the European Union,” she told TV station BFM Business. “This case shows the challenges in biotech where when you try to do innovation you cannot succeed every time.”


Link.


----------



## elbows (Sep 15, 2021)

One of the September SAGE documents released is a Public Health England analysis of the duration of protection that vaccines seem to be offering so far.



			https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1017309/S1362_PHE_duration_of_protection_of_COVID-19_vaccines_against_clinical_disease.pdf
		




> Figure 1 shows VE against symptomatic disease for all ages. Follow-up data for Alpha is limited as Alpha circulation had stopped by the time the later follow-up periods were reached. VE against Delta is generally lower with the AstraZeneca vaccine than the Pfizer vaccine, but with both vaccines, waning of VE against symptomatic disease is seen from around 10 weeks, reaching just over 50% with AstraZeneca and just over 70% with Pfizer by 20+ weeks. With the Moderna vaccine, data is not yet available beyond 10 weeks.





> VE against hospitalisation for the AstraZeneca and Pfizer vaccines for all ages is shown in Figure 2. Waning against hospitalisation appears to be much more limited, in particular with the Pfizer vaccine where VE of around 95% continues to be seen beyond 20 weeks after vaccination. With the AstraZeneca vaccine, there appears to be some waning to just under 80% VE against hospitalisation from 20+ weeks.





> VE against death for all ages is shown in Figure 3. Similar to hospitalisation, there appears to only be limited waning of VE against death, though for AstraZeneca, follow-up data beyond 20 weeks is underpowered.





> Stratifying by age group gives similar results to the overall analysis, though there is some suggestion of greater waning with AstraZeneca in the oldest age groups from 20+ weeks, however confidence intervals are wide (Figure 4). Further stratifying the 40-64 years age group according to whether they are in a risk group indicates that the waning seen with AstraZeneca is restricted to those in clinical risk groups (Figure 5). In those aged over 65 years, the broader clinical risk group variable is not available, however, Figure 6 shows the stratification according to whether they are in the narrower clinically extremely vulnerable group. Waning appears to be greater with both AstraZeneca and Pfizer among those in the clinically extremely vulnerable group, though data beyond 20 weeks is limited.


----------



## 2hats (Sep 15, 2021)

2hats said:


> Might have access to as yet unpublished data from COV-Boost ...


Or someone may perhaps have been confusing it with Cov-Compare - PI of COV-Boost has stated (R4 PM 14Sep) that all the data for that are not in/analysed yet.


----------



## 2hats (Sep 15, 2021)

More vaccination data from Israel* which _might_ provide some insight into the pandemic endgame (warning: controlled for age, gender and timing of infection, but other biases almost certainly still persist).

Any infection plus original vax combination appears to be as effective as a recent third dose booster (and durable too; can't comment on third dose booster in this respect yet).




Note that vaccination then infection appears to not be quite as effective as infection then vaccination (as Crotty speculated), and particularly so for 6-12 months previous (though not a reason to risk getting infected than vaccinated, of course).

The implication of this data is that some degree of natural immunity will inevitably play a role in reaching a steady state herd immunity situation. That is, a number of 'breakthrough' cases in a highly vaccinated population, gradually reducing in number as the years pass. Because we can't keep boosting every couple of months to keep most of the population up at that >10x less risk level.

* original summary of analysis here.


----------



## 2hats (Sep 16, 2021)

Another gem from Crotty. Here a comprehensive longitudinal study of low dose mRNA-1273 (25 μg ie one-quarter of the standard dose) recipients from early dosing trials last year. (Note that BNT162b2 standard dosing is 30 μg).

T cell, binding and neutralising antibody responses to the 25-μg Moderna mRNA-1273 vaccine (two doses, standard interval) were examined over 7 months post-immunisation, across multiple age groups (35 participants, ages 18-70+, 20 male, predominately white), to assess whether pre-existing cross-reactive T cell memory impacts vaccine-generated immunity.

They found strong T cell memory ( CD4, CD8, TFH and cytokine) at 6 months after the second dose that looks like it will endure for several years.
 
This low (quarter) dose regimen produced immunoresponses similar to full (100 μg) dosing, with comparable CD8 populations and only a two-fold reduction in CD4 and antibodies, at least equalling natural immunity alone (previous research has highlighted vaccine induced immunity as being more durable than natural immunity alone). Whilst a small reduction in antibodies was observed, CD4 and CD8 T cell memory in the older cohorts (56+) were comparable to younger (18-55) cohorts at the same time points. Pre-existing cross-reactive memory T cells were found to enhance spike-specific CD4+ T cell, TFH, and antibody responses after a single dose. Cross-reactive memory TFH cells may both accelerate B cell priming and antibody responses to a new antigen, and also increase robustness of long-term humoral immunity.

This work highlights the possibility of deploying dose sparing and lower reactogenic regimens which are both effective and durable.
DOI: 10.1126/science.abj9853.


----------



## elbows (Sep 16, 2021)

And here we see some vaccine issues combine with longstanding complaints that the medical establishment doesnt take all issues involving womens health seriously enough. Or at the very least I'd say that was part of the backdrop for stories like this, although the following article doesnt explicitly say so.









						Call for investigation of menstrual changes after Covid jabs
					

There is no evidence of any impact on fertility - but research will help to counter false claims.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## 2hats (Sep 17, 2021)

Commencement of recruiting for the COM-CoV3 study which is investigating mixing vaccines (full-dose Pfizer, half-dose Pfizer, full-dose Novavax and half-dose Moderna) in adolescents (12-16 years).








						Novavax joins Oxford mix-and-match COVID-19 vaccine study in adolescents
					

The Phase II clinical trial will include at least 360 adolescents aged 12-16 years old




					www.pharmatimes.com


----------



## 2hats (Sep 17, 2021)

From PH Scotland, a matched case-control study investigating whether vaccine efficacy against severe COVID-19 has decreased since delta/B.1.617.2 became the predominant variant, and how efficacy wanes with time since second dose (the study analysis covers cases from the period 1 December 2020 to 19 August 2021).

The efficacy of two vaccine doses against severe COVID-19 in the most recent time windows was found to be around 92% and did not differ between AZD1222 and mRNA (BNT162b2/mRNA-1273) products. Efficacy against the broader category of hospitalised or fatal COVID-19 remains slightly lower for the AZD1222 vaccine than for mRNA vaccines (88% versus 91%).

Efficacy against COVID-19 declined rapidly in the first two months since second dose (any vaccine type) but more slowly thereafter. For hospitalised or fatal COVID-19 the model best supported by the data was one in which efficacy was the sum of a rapidly waning effect with half-life of 17 (95%CI:9-39) days and a time-invariant efficacy of 83%.



> These results suggest that the rapid early waning of efficacy against hospitalised COVID-19 after the second dose tapers off within a few months. This weakens the rationale for policies based on delivering booster doses to the entire population, rather than to vulnerable individuals for focused protection.



DOI: 10.1101/2021.09.12.21263448.


----------



## 2hats (Sep 20, 2021)

Phase 2/3 trial of two-dose regimen of 10µg BNT162b2 administered 21 days apart in (around 4,500) 5-11 year olds finds it to be well-tolerated and safe, with strong immunogenic responses comparable to 16-25 year olds given the standard 30µg dose regimen (used as the control for this study).


Results of trials in under-5s, dosing at 3µg, are expected later this year.


----------



## 2hats (Sep 21, 2021)

From the CDC, a case-control analysis (3,689 US adults aged 18+ years) of vaccine effectiveness of the three vaccines approved there.


> These real-world data suggest that the 2-dose Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine regimens provide more protection than does the 1-dose Janssen viral vector vaccine regimen. Although the Janssen vaccine had lower observed VE, 1 dose of Janssen vaccine still reduced risk for COVID-19–associated hospitalization by 71%.
> 
> VE against COVID-19 hospitalization was slightly lower for the 2-dose Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine than the Moderna vaccine, with this difference driven by a decline in VE after 120 days for the Pfizer-BioNTech but not the Moderna vaccine. The Moderna vaccine also produced higher postvaccination anti-RBD antibody levels than did the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. Differences in VE between the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine might be due to higher mRNA content in the Moderna vaccine, differences in timing between doses (3 weeks for Pfizer-BioNTech versus 4 weeks for Moderna), or possible differences between groups that received each vaccine that were not accounted for in the analysis.







DOI: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7038e1.

Meanwhile, separately, J&J have stated that their vaccine is more effective in a two-dose regimen.


> Additional data show a booster increases protection 94% protection [against symptomatic (moderate to severe/critical) COVID-19] in the U.S. with booster given at two months, four-fold increase in antibodies when given at two months, 12-fold increase in antibodies when booster given at six months.











						J&J says Covid booster shot is 94% effective in the U.S. when given two months after first dose
					

A J&J booster dose given six months out from the first shot appears to be potentially even more protective against Covid, the company added.




					www.cnbc.com


----------



## 2hats (Sep 21, 2021)

Beginning phase 1 trials in Manchester, the (Gritstone) self-amplifying mRNA second generation SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, GRT-R910 (codes for spike protein and highly conserved non-spike proteins to increase breadth of immune response). Here investigating utility as a booster to AZD1222 to improve resilience to new VOCs in the elderly, looking at dosing, reactogenicity and immunogenicity.








						Early trial of multivariant COVID-19 vaccine booster begins in Manchester
					

A phase one trial of a multivariant COVID-19 Vaccine has been launched by US pharmaceutical company Gritstone in collaboration with The University of Manchester and Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust.Initially involving participants aged 60+, its creators say the drug - called GRT-R910 –...




					www.manchester.ac.uk


----------



## 2hats (Sep 21, 2021)

Initial results from a phase 1/2 dosing trial in Thailand of the low-cost, inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine NDV-HXP-S (ButanVac, UTex Austin). Promising reactogenic and immunogenic results from this study see the programme move forward with the 3µg adjuvanted (CpG1018) dosing to advanced phase 2 trials.
 
DOI: 10.1101/2021.09.17.21263758.


----------



## elbows (Sep 22, 2021)

I have a vague memory that this Llama stuff briefly popped up in the news a long time ago and I commented on it somewhere on u75 at the time, and it sounds like its still showing promise:









						Covid: Immune therapy from llamas shows promise
					

An immune therapy derived from llama blood shows "exciting potential" in early coronavirus trials.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## two sheds (Sep 22, 2021)

I'm still wondering where all the dogs are that can detect coronavirus in someone. Perhaps they can't smell the delta variant.


----------



## 2hats (Sep 23, 2021)

On extending the dosing interval, here from Quebec, a study investigating immunoresponses in short (standard 3-4 week) and long (16 week) dosing of naive and previously infected vaccinees with BNT162b2.

Previously reported "super" hybrid immunity was observed for single-dose convalescents (blue) as was the minimal subsequent response to a long interval second dose (black) - similar to that in the standard double-dosing regimen.

For the previously uninfected, a 16 week dosing interval (between first and second dose; red) resulted in antibody (perhaps significantly IgA to both RBD and spike overall) immunoresponse nearing that afforded by hybrid immunity and typically far in excess of that of previously infected persons vaccinated with the standard dosing interval (green).

Notably, looking at neutralisation of a wide range of variants, long interval dosing of the previously infected resulted in breadth of immunity comparable to that of hybrid immunity in (any dose) convalescent vaccinees.

This study _might_ suggest that it could be worth investigating an even longer dosing interval for convalescents (cf proposed third-dose booster intervals), strongly points to extended intervals enriching affinity maturation and hints at it improving class switching recombination. Conclusions are not inconsistent with earlier commentary and speculations of Crotty (LJII).
DOI: 10.1101/2021.09.17.21263532.


----------



## 2hats (Sep 23, 2021)

Results from the phase 2/3 trial of Clover Biopharmaceuticals' CpG1018/Alum adjuvanted protein vaccine, SCB-2019.

100% [95%CI:42.7-100] efficacy against severe COVID-19, 100% [95%CI:25.3-100] against hospitalisation and 83.7% (95%CI:55.9-95.4] efficacy against moderate-to-severe COVID-19 caused by any variant, with 78.7% [95%CI:57.3-90.4] efficacy against COVID-19 of any severity caused by delta/B.1.617.2.

It was well tolerated with a favourable safety profile. The company planes to seek regulatory approval in China and the EU and emergency use listing with the WHO (for COVAX) both in the final quarter of this year.




__





						Clover’s COVID-19 Vaccine Candidate Demonstrates 79% Efficacy Against Delta in Global Phase 2/3 SPECTRA Trial Dominated by Variants of Concern and Interest - Clover Biopharmaceuticals
					






					www.cloverbiopharma.com


----------



## 2hats (Sep 23, 2021)

Novavax have applied to the WHO for emergency use listing for NVX-CoV2373 for COVAX.








						Novavax applies to WHO for emergency listing of COVID-19 vaccine
					

Novavax Inc and its partner Serum Institute of India have applied to the World Health Organization for an emergency use listing of Novavax's COVID-19 vaccine, potentially clearing the way for the shot to ship to many poorer countries, the company said on Thursday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Sep 23, 2021)

Codagenix's COVI-VAC single-dose, intranasal, live-attenuated vaccine demonstrates promising reactogenicity and immunogenicity results in a phase 1 dose escalation trial.








						Codagenix Announces Safety and Immunogenicity Data from Phase 1 COVID-19 Intranasal Vaccine Trial and Intent to Progress to Phase 2/3 Studies
					

/PRNewswire/ -- Codagenix Inc., a clinical-stage biotechnology company pioneering a novel platform for vaccines and oncolytic virus therapies, today announced...




					www.prnewswire.com


----------



## 2hats (Sep 23, 2021)

Valneva has expanded its VLA2001 UK trials: the COV-Compare phase 3 study has added adolescents (12-17 years) and its earlier UK phase 1/2 study will now investigate six-month post-second-dose boosters for earlier participants. A trial focusing on VLA2001 in elderly volunteers is also underway in New Zealand.





						Valneva Continues Expansion of Clinical Trials of its Inactivated COVID-19 Vaccine Candidate VLA2001 - Valneva
					

Commences recruitment of Adolescents into Phase 3 trial “Cov-Compare” Enrolls participants in the Phase 1/2 Booster Trial Saint-Herblain (France), September 23, 2021 – Valneva SE, (Nasdaq: VALN; Euronext Paris: VLA) a specialty vaccine company, today announced that it has commenced recruitment...




					valneva.com


----------



## elbows (Oct 1, 2021)

Molnupiravir sounds very useful as long as people take it early enough.









						Covid antiviral pill can halve risk of hospitalisation
					

Promising results mean a clinical trial has ended early and emergency authorisation is being sought.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## spring-peeper (Oct 1, 2021)

Saw this under politiFact 









						PolitiFact - Drug Pfizer is studying for COVID-19 not ‘suspiciously similar’ to ivermectin
					

Ivermectin, an anti-parasite drug sometimes used to treat horses, has not been proven effective as a treatment for COVID




					www.politifact.com
				






> A headline on Zero Hedge, which we’ve fact-checked before, alluded to ivermectin by stating:
> 
> "Pfizer Launches Final Study For COVID Drug That's Suspiciously Similar To 'Horse Paste.’"
> 
> The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.)






> "So no reason to call the Pfizer drug ‘Pfizermectin,’" Garry said. "Clever, but no basis in fact."



I had to look up protease.



> "The Pfizer compound, by contrast, was designed explicitly to target the protease of the virus," he said. "Ivermectin is an anti-parasitic drug that has a distinct mechanism of action against parasites and may happen to have some similarities, by chance, with the Pfizer compound."


----------



## Supine (Oct 1, 2021)

spring-peeper said:


> Saw this under politiFact
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Looks like fake news to me. Happy to be corrected but…

I worked on an ivermectin project about 25 years ago! Fun fact, one batch a year is made and sent to Africa to treat African River Blindness for free


----------



## 2hats (Oct 3, 2021)

Regarding vaccines tuned to specific variants, here an investigation from Durban/UCL/UWash/others, where they mapped neutralisation of evolved virus (here D190, found in some HIV patient cases) and ancestral D614G, beta/B.1.351 and delta/B.1.617.2 variant viruses by antibodies elicited by each of those VOC in SARS-CoV-2 convalescent individuals.

Beta virus exhibited a moderate 7-fold escape and delta only a 2-fold escape from neutralisation by ancestral (D614G) variant elicited sera. However delta demonstrated a 12-fold escape from beta elicited immunity, whilst beta virus exhibited 34-fold escape from delta immunity. Evolved virus had 9-fold escape from ancestral immunity, 27-fold escape from delta immunity, but was effectively neutralised (3-fold escape) by beta immunity.





The researchers concluded that beta and delta are serologically distant, further apart from each other than each is from their common ancestor. A key observation was that virus (D190) evolved in episodes of prolonged infection (eg the immunocompromised) is serologically closer to beta and further from delta. These results suggest that SARS-CoV-2 is diverging into distinct serological phenotypes and that vaccines tailored to one variant may leave populations vulnerable to infections with another.

Thus it may be best to avoid dedicated, specific VOC-tuned vaccines and either stick with the backbone of a common ancestor (eg D614G) or develop multivalent vaccines (such as delta/beta/D614G). Widespread deployment of a vaccine that is specifically targeting delta/B.1.617.2 might create a future opening for beta/B.1.351 and progeny.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.09.14.21263564.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 3, 2021)

A couple of preprints of relevance to vacinee PCR/antigen testing, viral loads, infection and possible implications for transmission.

From Oxford (and others) a retrospective observational cohort study of contacts of SARS-CoV-2-infected index cases using contact testing data from England, investigating variation in transmission between alpha/B.1.1.7 and delta/B.1.617.2 since second dose vaccination.

Through large-scale contact tracing data, they show that BNT162b2 and AZD1222 vaccination both reduce onward transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from vaccinated individuals (BNT162b2 moreso than AZD1222). However reductions in transmission are lower for both vaccines for delta compared to alpha. Both vaccines protect against delta but to a lesser degree than alpha, particularly in milder cases (where delta infection rates are higher and transmission more likely) and this protection wanes over time (faster for BNT162b2 than AZD1222).

They found that most of the effect of vaccines persisted after adjusting for Ct values, implying that factors other than PCR-measured viral load at diagnosis are important in vaccine-associated transmission reductions:


> It is possible vaccination acts by facilitating faster clearance of viable infectious virions, but leaving damaged ineffective virions behind that still contain PCR-detectable RNA. This may mean antigen assays have advantages in predicting the risk of onward transmission in those vaccinated, but this needs further study.


DOI: 10.1101/2021.09.28.21264260.

Separately, a study (UCDavies/UCSF/Berkeley) found no significant difference in PCR cycle threshold values between vaccinated and unvaccinated, asymptomatic and symptomatic groups infected with delta/B.1.617.2, regardless of age or gender.




In this analysis, over 20% of positive, vaccinated individuals had low PCR Ct-values (<20), a third of which were asymptomatic when tested. If such cases carry a high viral load they be a major factor in driving the on-going pandemic.


> The data gathered in this study during the surge of the Delta variant strongly support the notion that neither vaccine status nor the presence or absence of symptoms should influence the recommendation and implementation of good public health practices, including mask wearing, testing, social distancing, and other measures designed to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2.


DOI: 10.1101/2021.09.28.21264262.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 5, 2021)

From the US (Kaiser) a retrospective cohort study of several million vaccinees (12+ years) assessing BNT162b2 effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection (by variant) and COVID-19 related hospital admission for up to 6 months post second dose.

Effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection was 73% (95%CI:72-74) and against COVID-19-related hospital admissions was 90% (95%CI:89-92). This effectiveness declined from 88% (95%CI:86-89)  to 47% (95%CI:43-51) from one month to five months after second dose. Vaccine effectiveness against infection specifically by delta/B.1.617.2 declined from 93% (95%CI:85-97) to 53% (95%CI:39-65)  from one month to five months after second dose. For other (non-delta) variants this waned from 97% (95%CI:95-99) to 67% (95%CI:45-80) from one month to 4-5 months after second dose. However vaccine effectiveness against hospital admissions for delta infections, across all ages, was 93% (95%CI:84-96) for up to 6 months post second dose.

Importantly, they add:


> Our variant-specific analysis suggests that *reductions in BNT162b2 effectiveness over time are likely to be primarily due to waning vaccine effectiveness rather than the delta variant escaping vaccine protection* given that effectiveness against delta variant infections was more than 90% within 1 month of full vaccination, reductions in effectiveness in infections by time since being fully vaccinated were observed irrespective of SARS-CoV-2 variant, and effectiveness against hospital admissions due to the delta variant was very high over the entire study period.


DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02183-8.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 5, 2021)

On the potential effect of vaccination on long covid symptoms and recovery, a matched cohort study (INRIA/Paris/Columbia) of several hundred French cases emulating a target trial.

This found that, after 120 days, long covid was significantly less severe, with less impact on patient's lives, in the vaccinated group compared to the control. It was found that vaccination (here that cohort may have received any one of four approved vaccines - BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, AZD1222, Ad26.COV2) doubled the remission rate of long covid symptoms.












						Efficacy of COVID-19 Vaccination on the Symptoms of Patients With Long COVID: A Target Trial Emulation Using Data From the ComPaRe e-Cohort in France
					

Background: Long COVID is a complex multiorgan disorder that can affect patients’ lives severely. Recent reports suggest that symptoms improve after COVID-19 va



					ssrn.com
				



Explanatory thread.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 8, 2021)

From Qatar, a study of mRNA vaccine effectiveness (in almost 1 million persons receiving two does, standard interval, of either BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273), that supports the ideas that waning of immunity is largely independent of age and variant type. Additionally that over the six months studied, whilst efficacy to infection may decline (around months 3-4 post second dose), efficacy to hospitalisation and death was maintained at a high level (96% or higher). Furthermore, efficacy was seen to wane to a greater degree than in countries where a much longer first-second dosing interval was instituted.
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2114114.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 8, 2021)

From Rockefeller, a study investigating longitudinal B cell response in non-convalescent vaccinees and comparing it to that of vaccine response in recovering patients.

Convalescents produce memory B cells which express increasingly broad and potent antibodies that are resistant to mutations, elevated further by (mRNA) vaccination, producing high levels of plasma neutralising activity against all variants tested (alpha, beta, iota, gamma, delta). In SARS-CoV-2 naive individuals a different outcome was observed:


> Between prime and boost, memory B cells produce antibodies that evolve increased neutralizing activity, but there is no further increase in potency or breadth thereafter. Instead, memory B cells that emerge 5 months after vaccination of naive individuals express antibodies that are similar to those that dominate the initial response.


The authors suggest that boosting vaccinated individuals with currently available mRNA vaccines will increase plasma neutralising activity but may not produce antibodies with equivalent breadth to those obtained by vaccinating convalescent individuals. Key perhaps, however, is that they observed that the memory B cell compartment continues to evolve for up to 5 months after mRNA vaccination. This suggests ideally one would seek such an interval between exposures to antigen, particularly in the case of boosters, in order to maximise memory based immunity.
DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-04060-7.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 9, 2021)

elbows said:


> Molnupiravir sounds very useful as long as people take it early enough.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Indeed - perhaps looks less promising in _patients_ - trials in India being halted for moderate-severe cases.


> Aurobindo Pharma Ltd wants to discontinue a late-stage trial of molnupiravir in moderate COVID-19 patients, the regulator's expert committee said on Friday.
> 
> "There is no significant efficacy against moderate COVID and the effective efficacy is towards mild cases," the source said on condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the discussions.











						Merck drug less effective against moderate COVID -India regulatory source
					

Merck & Co's experimental antiviral drug molnupiravir has not shown "significant efficacy" against moderate COVID-19, a source with the Drug Controller General of India said.




					www.reuters.com
				











						Two Indian drugmakers to end trials of generic Merck pill for moderate COVID-19
					

Two Indian drugmakers have requested permission to end late-stage trials of their generic versions of Merck & Co's promising experimental oral antiviral drug molnupiravir to treat moderate COVID-19, a week after Merck said its own trial had succeeded for mild-to-moderate patients.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Oct 13, 2021)

2hats said:


> Curevac CVnCoV mRNA vaccine final data from their phase 2b/3 trial (40,000 participants) have been announced. It demonstrated vaccine efficacy of 48% against COVID-19 of any severity across all age groups and 15 variants. For participants aged 18 to 60 and across all 15 variants vaccine efficacy was 53% against disease of any severity, 77% against moderate and severe disease and it provided 100% protection against hospitalisation or death. A favourable safety profile was observed in all age groups. Curevac are now developing a second generation mRNA candidate, CV2CoV, with the aim of clinical trials later this year and regulatory approval in 2022.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Curevac confirm that they are withdrawing their first generation mRNA vaccine (CVnCoV) from regulatory review. They are pursuing development of their second generation mRNA vaccine (CV2CoV), partnering with GSK, built with tweaked non-structural regions around the ORF sequences (akin to the technique used in BNT162b2, mRNA-1273 to initially shield the vaccine from the immune system during delivery).








						CureVac drops COVID-19 vaccine, pins hope on next-generation shots
					

CureVac NV said on Tuesday it will give up on its first-generation COVID-19 vaccine candidate and instead focus on collaborating with GSK to develop improved mRNA vaccine technology.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Oct 13, 2021)

Intranasal version of Sputnik V to undergo trials.








						Russia to test COVID-19 vaccine in form of nasal spray
					

Russia will test a nasal spray form of its Sputnik V vaccine against COVID-19 among adult volunteers, according to a state document published on Tuesday, as the country struggles to rein in rising numbers of infections and deaths.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Oct 14, 2021)

The NIH booster mix and match study results preprint is now available (FDA 2-day committee meeting on boosters and mixing starts tomorrow).

This US phase 1/2 clinical trial investigated safety, reactogenicity and (humoral) immunogenicity in 458 adults who previously received one of three US FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccines at least 12 weeks prior, wherein each received a booster injection with one of mRNA-1273, Ad26.COV2.S, or BNT162b2 30-mcg, making nine combinations in total.

The authors reached similar conclusions to previous work from the UK and Germany on mixing AZD1222 and BNT162b2 (see eg posts #1429 & #1434) - the combinations were well tolerated and safe, with comparable reactogenicity to the original two-dose series. Elevated antibody responses were measured in every instance. In particular mRNA vaccines (both BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273) significantly boosted J&J Ad26.COV2.S (from a lower study baseline).
 


> In summary, this preliminary report demonstrates that boosting with any of the three vaccines currently licensed or authorized for emergency use in the US will stimulate an anamnestic response in persons who previously received of the primary series of any of these vaccines. Homologous boosts provided a wide range of immunogenicity responses, with heterologous boosts providing comparable or higher titers. Reactogenicity and adverse events were similar across booster groups. These data suggest that if a vaccine is approved or authorized as a booster, an immune response will be generated regardless of the primary Covid-19 vaccination regimen.


DOI: 10.1101/2021.10.10.21264827.








						J&J COVID-19 shot gets better boost from Moderna or Pfizer in NIH study
					

People who got Johnson & Johnson Inc’s COVID-19 vaccine as a first shot had a stronger immune response when boosted with vaccines from Pfizer Inc /BioNTech SE or Moderna Inc , a study run by the National Institutes of Health showed on Wednesday.




					www.reuters.com
				




e2a: FDA presentation of this study data (15Oct2021) also covered variants, indicating heterologous boosts appear to produce immunoresponses which would suggest good coverage of VOCs (B.1.1.7/alpha and B.1.617.2/delta).


----------



## 2hats (Oct 14, 2021)

FDA expert panel recommends 50µg mRNA-1273 boosters in 65+ and high risk groups.








						U.S. FDA advisers back Moderna COVID booster shots for older and high-risk people
					

A panel of expert advisers to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration unanimously voted on Thursday to recommend booster shots of Moderna Inc's COVID-19 vaccine for Americans aged 65 and older and those at high risk of severe illness or occupational exposure to the virus.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Oct 15, 2021)

Pfizer/BioNTech submit data (see post #1492) to the EMA for regulatory approval of a two-dose 10µg regimen of BNT162b2 in children 5-12 years of age.





						Pfizer and BioNTech Submit Data to EMA for the Vaccination of Children 5 to
					

NEW YORK and MAINZ, Germany, October 15, 2021 — Pfizer Inc. (NYSE: PFE, “Pfizer”) and BioNTech SE (Nasdaq: BNTX, “BioNTech”) today announced that they submitted data supporting the vaccination of children 5 to




					investors.biontech.de


----------



## 2hats (Oct 16, 2021)

From a letter (NEJM) describing a small (31 BNT162b2; 22 mRNA-1273; 8 Ad26.COV2.S) US longitudinal immunoresponse study, a suggestion that viral vector vaccines might (eventually) promote better CD8 T cell responses than mRNA vaccines (at least in those with no prior infection).

The, by now, familiar elevated initial antibody responses were seen in the mRNA vaccinees, with a noticeably lower response for J&J/Janssen Ad26.COV2.S. However, by month 8 the mRNA antibody responses had declined significantly, whilst Ad26.COV2.S induced CD8 was significantly higher (CD4 somewhat lower; antibody decline less pronounced than for mRNA).

Importantly - the authors state that there were no convalescents in the study sample (nor _breakthrough_ infections), though this is described as being "self-reported" (there is no indication of screening for anti-N). Likewise no participants on immunosuppressants (also self-reported).

Observations could be related to (viral vector v mRNA) half-life of antigen in the body (eg perhaps gut) and/or standard mRNA dosing interval being so short (consider affinity maturation truncation). Alternatively (or also), just to complicate matters further, some of the J&J vaccinees, due to low initial antibody levels relative to mRNA vaccinees, could conceivably have been more prone to asymptomatic/paucisymptomatic infections mid-study, resulting in subsequent further broadening of T cell responses and slightly elevated antibody response (obfuscating decline).
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc2115596.


----------



## dtb (Oct 16, 2021)

A healthy diet, vitamin D (high dosage), zinc and NAC.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 18, 2021)

The phase 3 Cov-Compare trial topline results for Valneva's VLA2001 inactivated, adjuvanted (CpG-1018) vaccine have just been announced (4,012 participants, 18+ years).

It met all co-primary endpoints, provoking a significantly stronger immunogenic response than AstraZeneca ChAdOx1/AZD1222.  Geometric mean titres for neutralisation antibodies (live virus assay) were 803.5 (95%CI:748.48-862.59) for VLA2001, compared to 576.6 (95%CI:543.6-611.7) for AZD1222. Seroconversion rates were non-inferior. Broad T cell responses were seen against spike, nucleocapsid and membrane proteins.

VLA2001 was well tolerated with significantly less adverse reactions compared to AZD1222. There were no severe cases of COVID-19 in either arm of the trial (during a period dominated by delta/B.1.617.2). Extension studies for booster, paediatric and elderly trials are underway. MHRA rolling submission is ongoing with final submission due in November and approval is hoped for by the end of the year. EMA pre-submission discussions have begun.

(Think I know what _booster_ I will be looking for next year).


----------



## Supine (Oct 18, 2021)

2hats said:


> The phase 3 Cov-Compare trial topline results for Valneva's VLA2001 inactivated, adjuvanted (CpG-1018) vaccine have just been announced (4,012 participants, 18+ years).
> 
> It met all co-primary endpoints, provoking a significantly stronger immunogenic response than AstraZeneca ChAdOx1/AZD1222.  Geometric mean titres for neutralisation antibodies were 803.5 (95%CI:748.48-862.59) for VLA2001, compared to 576.6 (95%CI:543.6-611.7) for AZD1222. Seroconversion rates were non-inferior. Broad T cell responses were seen against spike, nucleocapsid and membrane proteins.
> 
> ...



So much for the tories saying it wouldn’t pass regulatory approval while they were cancelling the UK orders.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 18, 2021)

From Sweden a mix and match study comparing AZD1222, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, during which time infections were dominated by delta/B.1.617.2.

Over a follow-up time of up to six months since vaccination, symptomatic COVID-19 infection was confirmed in 187 (2/100k days) heterologous and 306 (7.1/100k days) individuals from the unvaccinated control group. Adjusted vaccine effectiveness was 67% (95%CI:59-73) for AZD1222/ BNT162b2, 79% (95%CI:62-88) for AZD1222/mRNA-1273. Both heterologous regimens had an effectiveness of 68% (95%CI:61-74) compared to 50% (95%CI:41-58) for homologous AZD1222.
DOI: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2021.100249.

New ONS results covering both alpha/B.1.1.7 and delta/B.1.617.2 dominated periods might suggest any (UK) vaccination has delivered 67% (95%CI:64-70) efficacy against any delta infection compared to 79% (95%CI:73-84) for any alpha infection, with 75% (95%CI:71-78) for symptomatic delta and 95% (95%CI:91-98) for symptomatic alpha.  BNT162b2 exhibited 73% (95%:70-76) efficacy to any delta infection compared to 62% (95%CI:58-66) for AZD1222.  For symptomatic infection BNT162b2 exhibited 83% (95%CI:79-86) to delta whilst AZD1222 was 69% (95%CI:64-74). However care should be exercised as, due to these observations being made over different windows of time (alpha Dec2020-May2021 and delta May-Aug2021) they may be confounded to degrees by both waning of immunogenicity and behavioural/NPI factors.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 18, 2021)

From the UK (PITCH and others) a study of immunogenicity when extending the dosing interval of BNT162b2.

It found that an extended interval (up to 14 weeks ) between doses was highly protective, with higher neutralising antibody levels compared to the standard, shorter regimen. In particular, virus-specific CD4+ T cells are enriched and B and T cell pools maintained. This suggests that the extended interval leads to effective humoral and cellular responses. The (by now) classic responses of hybrid immunity in the previously infected cohort, and their broader responses to variants, were also noted.



> In conclusion, the immunogenicity of longer regimens appears robust, and indeed for antibody measurements, improved over the conventional 3-4 week regimen. We provide evidence that T cells are induced and sustained during the longer period between doses in the 6-14 week regimen, but there is an impact of dosing interval on the relative proportion of T cell subsets. Ongoing studies in this cohort will monitor the durability of antibody and T cell responses 6 months after a 2nd  vaccine dose delivered in an extended dosing interval, and response to 3rd  “booster” doses where given. For policy makers, optimal dosing intervals may depend on community prevalence, population immunity from natural infection, circulating variants of concern and vaccine supply. A short dosing interval gives early protection, whereas an increased interval appears to improve peak neutralizing antibody levels.


DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2021.10.011.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 20, 2021)

From Sweden (Karolinska and others) a longitudinal study of post-vaccination immune response, following AZD1222 vaccinees for three months and BNT162b2 vaccinees for seven months (in total a few hundred healthcare workers, predominately female, aged around 40-60 years).

Vaccinated convalescents were found to have both higher neutralising titres and less rapid decline of such in both AZD1222 and BNT162b2 cohorts compared to previously uninfected vaccinees. Notably, titres held up to (what appear to be) efficacious protective levels for up to 3 months for AZD1222 recipients and for up to 7 months for BNT162b2 recipients.



> Neutralizing capacity against ten SARS-CoV-2 variants analysed, including all four VOCs, remained substantially higher in SARS-CoV-2 recovered vaccinees as compared to SARS-CoV-2 naive vaccinees throughout the study period. Although vaccinated SARS-CoV-2 recovered individuals may eventually need a booster, these findings suggest that vaccine in immune competent SARS-CoV-2 recovered evokes antibody levels that are sufficient for protection during a longer time period than those rendered in SARS-CoV-2 naïve vaccinees.


DOI: 10.1101/2021.10.16.21264948.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 20, 2021)

Supine said:


> So much for the tories saying it wouldn’t pass regulatory approval while they were cancelling the UK orders.


Valneva CFO yesterday (R4 interview) said they were shocked by the cancellation, particularly as no immunogenicity trial data was available at the time, and that there was no clarity in communications from government ministers.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 21, 2021)

From the US (Vyriad/Imanis) an oral active vaccine booster candidate, VSV-SARS2(+G). This is built around a replication competent vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) whose glycoprotein code, which provides the structure that mediates entry into mammalian cells, is effectively replaced with the sequence for (early type) SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (C terminal domain slightly modified), plus some tweaks to tune replication (plasmids encoding the original glycoproteins are added back prior to harvesting).

In animal models an oral dose for previously (IM) vaccinated subjects was demonstrated to significantly boost buccal and bronchial neutralising antibody titres.

Clinical testing of oral VSV-SARS2(+G) vaccine is now planned.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.10.16.464660.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 22, 2021)

A study (Northwestern) investigating modulation of the prime dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine: less indeed appears to be more.

In animal models they observed that a fractional first dose (1000-fold lower) of a viral vector (AD5 based) SARS-CoV-2 vaccine resulted in greater humoral and cellular immunoresponses after the second dose (a much lower intra-dose response was also seen). They also noted an improved response with a longer intra-dose interval. Lower anti-vector immunity was observed post-first-dose, which may contribute to the enhanced effect by increasing the half-life of second-exposure antigen in the body.
  
They speculate that the first dose may briefly leave the vaccinee more susceptible to infection, but this needs further investigation. The observations may also provide some insight into the mechanisms underlying hybrid immunity.

This is, in essence, rediscovery of similar observations in the original AstraZeneca trials wherein one arm was mistakenly under-dosed resulting in a more complex analysis of low-dose/standard-dose plus standard-dose/standard-dose trial participants and the discovery that the former subsequently exhibited higher antibody immunity titres. Reduced-first-dose regimens may offer more durable, broader, improved immunoresponse, reduce incidences of adverse reactions and provide dose sparing.
DOI: 10.1126/sciimmunol.abi8635.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 22, 2021)

Pfizer/BioNTech have submitted dosing/reactogenicity/immunogenicity data to the FDA for EUA consideration of a two dose 10µg BNT162b2 for 5-11 year olds (dosing interval 21 days).

At 10µg adverse reactions are very low (compared to a standard dose 30µg regimen); they are almost comparable to the placebo arm. The lower dose was observed to induce better neutralising titres than the standard dose. Efficacy to any delta/B.1.617.2 infection, one week after second dose, was 90.7% (95%CI:67.7-98.3).


----------



## _Russ_ (Oct 22, 2021)

A lower dose of the Vaccine, works better and less side effects than the normal dose in Young uns?


----------



## 2hats (Oct 22, 2021)

Shouldn't be too surprising that there are less side effects.

Both dose levels were pretty much comparable in the immunobridging phase (when they were using immunological data to pick the optimum dosage) - the lower dose just slightly better than the standard dose. Efficacy (the next phase) was then only studied for the lower 10µg dose as that is the one that offered the lowest reactogenicity for the highest immunogenicity.

Essentially the 10µg dose is more than sufficient from an immunological point of view and offers a very low adverse reaction rate.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 23, 2021)

For completeness, the top line 'third dose' booster results from Pfizer/BioNTech for standard dose (30µg) BNT162b2 administered around 11 months after the original standard two-dose series, which were announced yesterday.

These are the first results from their randomised, controlled COVID-19 vaccine booster trial (<10k participants, 16+ years), which demonstrated a relative vaccine efficacy of 95.6% (95%CI:89.3-98.6) to disease occurrence (during a period when delta/B.1.617.2 was dominant), consistent irrespective of age, sex, race, ethnicity, or comorbidity.

Note that the efficacy quoted is disease reduction in the boosted vaccinees relative to unboosted (ie original two-dose series only) vaccinees (all of who had no prior infection), and not relative to unvaccinated persons.




__





						Pfizer and BioNTech Announce Phase 3 Trial Data Showing High Efficacy of a Booster Dose of Their COVID-19 Vaccine | Pfizer
					

First results from any randomized, controlled COVID-19 vaccine booster trial demonstrate a relative vaccine efficacy of 95.6% against disease during a period when Delta was the prevalent strain In trial with more than 10,000 participants 16 years of age and older, COVID-19 booster was found to...




					www.pfizer.com
				




Related, a small study of BNT162b2 booster neutralisation of early wild-type, beta/B.1.351 and delta B.1.617.2 (23 US vaccinees, 18-85 years, in a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 1–2–3 pivotal trial), that supports the above results. Here the 30µg booster was administered around 8-9 months after the original standard two-dose series. Immunoresponses more akin to that of hybrid immunity, with significant increases in neutralising immunity substantially greater than that following the original second dose, were observed.





DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc2113468.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 24, 2021)

A brief review of the state of play of new variant vaccine development.

Essentially - there is no pressing need for any right now. The main players (Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna and AstraZeneca) are engaged in dress rehearsals, practicing, tuning the entire pipeline and making sure they are in a position to move swiftly should a new variant with high degree of escape arise (ie a significant jump in hospitalised vaccinees).

To this end they have been producing small test runs of variant specific vaccines (Pfizer and AstraZeneca are testing beta variant based vaccines and Moderna is trialling a multivalent beta/delta one). But there are no plans to offer these to the public. The aim is to iron out any potential issues and streamline the process to the same degree that is seen with annual flu vaccine selection (only perhaps even faster with mRNA platforms).








						COVID vaccine makers brace for a variant worse than Delta
					

Companies are updating vaccines and testing them on people to prepare for whatever comes next in the pandemic.




					www.nature.com


----------



## existentialist (Oct 24, 2021)

2hats said:


> A brief review of the state of play of new variant vaccine development.
> 
> Essentially - there is no pressing need for any right now. The main players (Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna and AstraZeneca) are engaged in dress rehearsals, practicing, tuning the entire pipeline and making sure they are in a position to move swiftly should a new variant with high degree of escape arise (ie a significant jump in hospitalised vaccinees).
> 
> ...


It seems to me that the Covid thing, if nothing else, has resulted in a step change in the practicalities of vaccine development.

I think the next 10  25 years is going to be very, very interesting in the world of immunology.


----------



## Supine (Oct 24, 2021)

existentialist said:


> It seems to me that the Covid thing, if nothing else, has resulted in a step change in the practicalities of vaccine development.
> 
> I think the next 10  25 years is going to be very, very interesting in the world of immunology.



Partly this is true as the mRNA platform has really shined with covid and the more traditional methods were already well developed over many years. Tbh though the advantage that really helps is the strain change regulatory pathway from getting annual flu jab approvals. This will be used to tune covid jabs as and when required. It means a lot of the red tape is already streamlined so the focus can be on selecting which strains are included. 

Combined flu/covid jabs would be logistically handy, and I know some trials have been done, but I’m not sure if it’ll become the norm. Time will tell.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 25, 2021)

Topline results comprising Moderna's interim data from the KidCOVE study. These are for an initial two-dose series of 50µg mRNA-1273 in (4,753) children, 6-11 years (half the adult doses).

Strong immunogenic responses were observed, with high seroconversion rate. The doses were will tolerated, with reaction comparable to those seen in adults. Specifically, in this trial, the SARS-CoV-2 neutralising antibody geometric mean ratio (GMR), comparing the response in children to the response in young adults from the phase 3 COVE study, was 1.5 (95%Cl:1.3-1.8), with a seroresponse rate of 99.3%.

Moderna plan to submit these data to FDA/EMA/etc in due course.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 27, 2021)

Novavax has just filed with the MHRA for regulatory approval of their SARS-CoV-2 NVX-CoV2373 protein sub-unit vaccine, based on their phase 3 trial results and other data. They expect to complete filings with regulatory authorities in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, plus the WHO, shortly. US FDA submission expected towards the end of the year.








						Novavax Files for Authorization of its COVID-19 Vaccine in the United Kingdom
					

Filing marks first protein-based COVID-19 vaccine submitted to MHRA for authorization All modules required for regulatory review, including CMC data, are now complete Submission based on Phase 3...




					ir.novavax.com


----------



## Supine (Oct 27, 2021)

A good article on how the manufacturers are practicing for quick regulatory approval if a mutation arrives that exhibits vaccine escape properties. 









						COVID vaccine makers brace for a variant worse than Delta
					

Companies are updating vaccines and testing them on people to prepare for whatever comes next in the pandemic.




					www.nature.com


----------



## 2hats (Oct 30, 2021)

Back to hybrid immunity - from MIT/Harvard a preprint for a small study (n=35) investigating delta-related 'breakthrough' infection immunity response in a US community (infections typically around 5-6 months after vaccination, so possibly in the timeframe of declining antibody titres reported by previous studies; note that this study does not provide longitudinal profiles).

The data suggest that hybrid immunity (infection plus vaccination) not unsurprisingly appears to work the other way too - boosted immune responses, both humoral and cellular, are observed in subsequently infected vaccinees.

It's a small sample but there _might_ be more heterogeneity in post-vaccination 'breakthrough' immunoresponses compared to earlier studies of infection-then-vaccination, and the study doesn't appear to screen earlier convalescents, so those with prior hybrid "superimmunity" _might_ be skewing the readout slightly.

Also, the results _could_ further be skewed somewhat as the age of the infected cohort (36-40 years) was notably lower than that of the uninfected cohort (54-66 years), quite possibly due to NPI-behaviours (think - degrees of immunosenescence). Additionally, the same 'infected' cohort _might_ have been more likely to have been convalescents prior to vaccination for similar reasons (disposition to risk taking).
DOI: 10.1101/2021.10.18.21265113.


----------



## 2hats (Nov 1, 2021)

Intranasal (spray) vaccine candidate, CyanVac's CVXGA1 (uses a PIV5, parainfluenza virus 5, live viral vector), has commenced trials and expects to deliver immunogenicity data in December.  CyanVac is hoping to conduct trials in 2022 to evaluate suitability as a booster.








						Nasal Vaccine to Battle COVID-19 Begins Clinical Trial at Cincinnati Children’s | Research Horizons
					

Clinical trial of nasal vaccine for COVID-19 begins at Cincinnati Children's




					scienceblog.cincinnatichildrens.org


----------



## 2hats (Nov 3, 2021)

2hats said:


> Pfizer/BioNTech have submitted dosing/reactogenicity/immunogenicity data to the FDA for EUA consideration of a two dose 10µg BNT162b2 for 5-11 year olds (dosing interval 21 days).
> 
> At 10µg adverse reactions are very low (compared to a standard dose 30µg regimen); they are almost comparable to the placebo arm. The lower dose was observed to induce better neutralising titres than the standard dose. Efficacy to any delta/B.1.617.2 infection, one week after second dose, was 90.7% (95%CI:67.7-98.3).


Approved by the FDA and now the CDC advisory panel have just voted unanimously in favour of it.








						US gives final clearance to COVID-19 shots for kids 5 to 11
					

U.S. health officials on Tuesday gave the final signoff to Pfizer’s kid-size COVID-19 shot, a milestone that opens a major expansion of the nation’s vaccination campaign to children as young as 5. The Food and Drug Administration already authorized the shots for children ages 5 to 11 — doses...




					apnews.com
				











						U.S. CDC director backs COVID-19 vaccine for children ages 5 to 11
					

The director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on Tuesday backed broad use of Pfizer's and BioNTech's COVID-19 vaccine in children ages 5 to 11, clearing the way for shots to go into young arms as soon as Wednesday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## elbows (Nov 4, 2021)

Molnupiravir ( Possible vaccines/treatment(s) for Coronavirus and Possible vaccines/treatment(s) for Coronavirus ) now approved in the UK.









						Molnupiravir: First pill to treat Covid gets approval in UK
					

The tablet - molnupiravir - will be given twice a day to patients recently diagnosed with the disease.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				






> The first pill designed to treat symptomatic Covid has been approved by the UK medicines regulator.
> The tablet - molnupiravir - will be given twice a day to vulnerable patients recently diagnosed with the disease.
> In clinical trials the pill, originally developed to treat flu, cut the risk of hospitalisation or death by about half.





> Molnupiravir, developed by the US drug companies Merck, Sharp and Dohme (MSD) and Ridgeback Biotherapeutics, is the first antiviral medication for Covid which can be taken as a pill rather than injected or given intravenously.
> The UK has agreed to purchase 480,000 courses with the first deliveries expected by mid November.
> Initially it will be given to both vaccinated and unvaccinated Britons through a national study, with extra data on its effectiveness collected before any decision to order more.
> The drug needs to be given within five days of symptoms developing to be most effective.
> It's not immediately clear how it will be distributed so quickly by the NHS. It's thought some care homes may be offered supplies while other elderly or vulnerable patients may be prescribed a course by their GP after testing positive for Covid.



This is exactly the sort of option which the UK establishment love. Its the sort of thing they can actually be bothered to do (eg we threw lots of tamiflu at the swine flu pandemic despite a lack of evidence it would help). Its when treatments like this arent available that the woeful nature of UK establishment thinking and response becomes so evident in deadly ways. So fingers crossed this option will actually make a real difference.


----------



## Cloo (Nov 4, 2021)

I'll be interested to see how they deliver it/ decide who gets it. Distribute via GP? At hospitals? Deliver it round to vulnerable people when they register positive test? Etc


----------



## 2hats (Nov 5, 2021)

Pfizer's oral antiviral candidate ritonavir (trade name PAXLOVID) was found to reduce the risk of hospitalisation or death by 89% compared to placebo in non-hospitalised high-risk adults with COVID-19. Ritonavir is a protease inhibitor (interferes with virus replication) originally developed for SARS-CoV-1.




__





						Pfizer’s Novel COVID-19 Oral Antiviral Treatment Candidate Reduced Risk of Hospitalization or Death by 89% in Interim Analysis of Phase 2/3 EPIC-HR Study | Pfizer
					

PAXLOVID™ (PF-07321332; ritonavir) was found to reduce the risk of hospitalization or death by 89% compared to placebo in non-hospitalized high-risk adults with COVID-19 In the overall study population through Day 28, no deaths were reported in patients who received PAXLOVID™ as compared to 10...




					www.pfizer.com
				




Original study behind this here - DOI: 10.1126/science.abl4784.


----------



## _Russ_ (Nov 5, 2021)

Cloo said:


> I'll be interested to see how they deliver it/ decide who gets it. Distribute via GP? At hospitals? Deliver it round to vulnerable people when they register positive test? Etc


They havnt ordered much of the stuff, perhaps in the realisation that the chances of recognising someone needs it before its too late to be of much use seem quite small in an era where medical services are so hard to access


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2021)

Which part of 'Initially it will be given to both vaccinated and unvaccinated Britons through a national study, with extra data on its effectiveness collected before any decision to order more.' are you finding hard to understand?


----------



## _Russ_ (Nov 5, 2021)

> will be given twice a day to vulnerable patients recently diagnosed with the disease.



There can be quite significant wait times for PCR diagnosis which itself is only going to be initiated after a +LFT or symptons showing


----------



## Cloo (Nov 5, 2021)

elbows said:


> Which part of 'Initially it will be given to both vaccinated and unvaccinated Britons through a national study, with extra data on its effectiveness collected before any decision to order more.' are you finding hard to understand?


Ah sorry, was skimming, managed to miss that bit. Will be interesting to see outcomes, and positive, I hope.


----------



## _Russ_ (Nov 5, 2021)

Cloo, I think the dig was probably aimed at me, hence my explanation for my thoughts above


----------



## elbows (Nov 5, 2021)

Yes sorry I wasnt clear, it was aimed at Russ.


----------



## 2hats (Nov 6, 2021)

Bharat Biotech's whole virion (D614G backbone) inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, COVAXIN/BBV152 (previous trial results in post #1375), has been given an emergency use listing by the WHO. This will help facilitate distribution of it for COVAX and should see it accepted more widely for travel purposes.








						WHO issues emergency use listing for eighth COVID-19 vaccine
					

Today, WHO issued an emergency use listing (EUL) for COVAXIN® (developed by Bharat Biotech), adding to a growing portfolio of vaccines validated by WHO for the prevention of COVID-19 caused by SARS-CoV-2.




					www.who.int
				




Novavax has also just submitted to the WHO for EUL for NVX-CoV2373.








						Novavax Files COVID-19 Vaccine for Emergency Use Listing with World Health Organization
					

Novavax, Inc. (Nasdaq: NVAX), a biotechnology company dedicated to developing and commercializing next-generation vaccines for serious infectious diseases, today announced the completion of its...




					ir.novavax.com
				



They also have preliminary data from booster trials indicating a 4-fold increase in neutralising antibodies over the initial two-dose regimen and a 6-fold increase in cross-reactive antibodies to delta/B.1.617.2. Additionally, they are about to trial their combination adjuvanted COVID-NanoFlu vaccine (a quadrivalent recombinant HA protein nanoparticle influenza vaccine combined with NVX-CoV2373).








						Novavax Reports Third Quarter 2021 Financial Results and Operational Highlights
					

Novavax, Inc. (NASDAQ: NVAX), a biotechnology company dedicated to developing and commercializing next-generation vaccines for serious infectious diseases, today announced its financial results...




					ir.novavax.com


----------



## 2hats (Nov 11, 2021)

From the University of Birmingham an anti-viral nasal spray (a composite λ-carrageenan polysaccharide gel) that targets SARS-CoV-2. Aiming to be available in the UK and Asia in early 2022.








						Birmingham Biotech and the University of Birmingham sign licensing agreement for anti-viral nasal spray against COVID-19 - University of Birmingham
					

Birmingham Biotech Ltd and the University of Birmingham have signed a licensing agreement to commercialise a novel anti-viral nasal spray th




					www.birmingham.ac.uk
				



DOI: 10.1002/adma.202008304.


----------



## 2hats (Nov 11, 2021)

The European Commission have made an advance order for up to 60 million doses of Valneva's inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, VLA2001 (subject to EMA approval). 

Separately, the Valneva CFO has publicly requested an apology from the UK government (see post #1475).








						Vaccine firm Valneva seeks apology over Javid comments
					

French firm says it will not rule out "legal recourse" against the UK government for loss of earnings.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## _Russ_ (Nov 12, 2021)

From New Scientist:
 Many groups worldwide are trying to develop vaccines that protect against a wide range of coronaviruses and prevent another pandemic. These efforts have now been boosted by the discovery that some healthcare workers had pre-existing immunity to the SARS-CoV-2 virus during the first wave of the pandemic.

 During the first half of 2020, around 700 healthcare workers in the UK were tested weekly as part of a crowdfunded study called COVIDsortium. Most of these people, who wore protective equipment, never tested positive for covid-19 in PCR tests or developed covid-19 – proteins that bind to the outside of viruses, preventing cells from being infected.

 However, when Leo Swadling and Mala Maini at University College London and their colleagues looked more closely, they found some of those who tested negative had a protein in their blood that is linked to covid-19 infection, as well as T cell responses to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. T cells are part of the immune system. It appears these people had what Swadling calls an “abortive infection”, where a strong, early T cell response enabled them to get rid of the virus very quickly.

 Cells infected by viruses sound the alarm by displaying viral proteins on their surface, and T cells are the immune cells that learn to recognise these proteins and destroy infected cells. Crucially, while antibodies can only target proteins on the outside of a virus, T cells can learn to recognise any viral proteins.

 When the team looked at early blood samples from the people who had an abortive infection, they found that even before being exposed to SARS-CoV-2, they had some T cells that could recognise the proteins that this virus uses to replicate itself inside infected cells.

 The most likely explanation is that these people were often exposed to the existing human coronaviruses that cause around 10 per cent of colds, says Maini. “We don’t know the historic infections of these individuals, so we don’t know for sure where the T cells are coming from,” she says.

*Preventing another pandemic*
 The proteins involved in viral replication are very similar in SARS-CoV-2 and other human and animal coronaviruses, meaning that if vaccines can be developed that elicit a strong T cell response against these proteins, they should protect against a very broad range of coronaviruses – a so-called universal or pan-coronavirus vaccine. One way to do this would be to add mRNAs coding for these proteins to mRNA vaccines that target the virus’s external spike protein.

 Adding extra components to the next generation of coronavirus vaccines might protect both against any new variants that might evolve and against animal coronaviruses that could jump into people and spark a new pandemic, says Swadling. “There is a strong rationale for adding these proteins alongside the spike protein,” he says.

 Many groups are already trying to develop coronavirus vaccines that provide broader protection, says Olga Pleguezuelos at UK-based company SEEK. Her team has already created such a vaccine based on the most conserved parts of coronavirus proteins. “It’s a matter of time before another of these members [of the coronavirus family] creates an epidemic or pandemic,” she says. “If we end up with something that is as infectious as covid and as lethal as MERS, then we are in serious trouble.”

 However, it isn’t clear how effective a vaccine that only produces a T cell response would be, Maini says. Most vaccines work by stimulating an antibody response, though many do also produce a T cell response.

 Many groups are developing universal flu vaccines based on eliciting a T cell response, but so far these haven’t proved highly effective. Other teams are instead focusing on getting antibodies to target parts of the outer viral proteins of the flu virus that don’t mutate. However, this won’t work with coronaviruses, says Peter Palese at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York. “They just don’t have a conserved region.”

 Journal reference: _Nature_, DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-04186-8


----------



## 2hats (Nov 15, 2021)

HIPRA Labs' (Spanish pharmaceuticals company) recombinant protein vaccine PHH-1V (storable at standard refrigeration temperatures), after showing promise in safety and reactogenicity rials over the summer, has been authorised to proceed to a phase 2b clinical trial in Spain to establishing dosing and immunogenicity. If trials are successful, HIPRA hope to make it available by mid-2022. They also have a mRNA vaccine in development.








						Spain's Hipra gets green light for Phase II COVID vaccine trials
					

Spain's medicines agency has authorised Catalonia-based pharmaceutical group Hipra to test a COVID-19 vaccine it is developing on more than 1,000 volunteers, Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez said on Monday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Nov 15, 2021)

(Oxford) a micro-needle skin patch administered (the 'T-chip', stable at room temperature) SARS-CoV-2 T cell priming vaccine, produced by Emergex, is about to start phase 1 trials in Switzerland. This vaccine platform delivers sets of synthetic immunogenic peptides, reverse-engineered from convalescent sera, on a gold nanoparticle scaffold, to stimulate a T cell response. This vaccine is designed to act as a prime dose, with subsequent natural infection (with severe disease risk substantially lowered) acting as the booster.








						UK firm to trial T-cell Covid vaccine that could give longer immunity
					

Exclusive: Oxfordshire-based Emergex gets go-ahead for trials in Switzerland for skin patch vaccineCoronavirus – latest updatesSee all our coronavirus coverage




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## 2hats (Nov 25, 2021)

UK PM Johnson disappointed Valneva COVID-19 shot did not gain approval
					

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said on Wednesday he was disappointed that Valneva's COVID-19 vaccine had not gained approval in Britain, two months after the government cancelled a supply deal worth 1.4 billion euro ($1.57 billion) for the shot.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Nov 25, 2021)

Russia to export nasal form of COVID vaccine that Putin took as booster
					

Russia said on Wednesday it planned to export a nasal form of its Sputnik vaccine against COVID-19, which President Vladimir Putin said he had taken as a booster.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Supine (Nov 25, 2021)

2hats said:


> UK PM Johnson disappointed Valneva COVID-19 shot did not gain approval
> 
> 
> British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said on Wednesday he was disappointed that Valneva's COVID-19 vaccine had not gained approval in Britain, two months after the government cancelled a supply deal worth 1.4 billion euro ($1.57 billion) for the shot.
> ...



I don’t get why he would even say this. It’s still expected to be approved, maybe even this year. Unless I’ve missed some news.


----------



## wemakeyousoundb (Nov 25, 2021)

Supine said:


> I don’t get why he would even say this. It’s still expected to be approved, maybe even this year. Unless I’ve missed some news.


bojo is a pretend idot deflecting from what is happening shocker

(sorry: not a dig at you supine, just my appraisal of the twat)


----------



## Supine (Nov 25, 2021)

wemakeyousoundb said:


> bojo is a pretend idot deflecting from what is happening shocker
> 
> (sorry: not a dig at you supine, just my appraisal of the twat)



I don’t agree at all. I think he is a real idiot


----------



## wemakeyousoundb (Nov 25, 2021)

Supine said:


> Supine said:
> 
> 
> > I don’t agree at all. I think he is a real idiot


potential massive derail so I replied in the idiot's own thread


----------



## Badgers (Nov 26, 2021)

wemakeyousoundb said:


> bojo is a pretend idot deflecting from what is happening shocker
> 
> (sorry: not a dig at you supine, just my appraisal of the twat)


----------



## 2hats (Nov 26, 2021)

Moderna have greenlit an omicron/B.1.1.529 vaccine candidate, mRNA-1273.529. They expect to have it ready for clinical testing within 60-90 days.

Novavax have also already started work on an omicron targeted version of their vaccine and expect to have that ready for testing and potential manufacture within a few weeks.








						Novavax developing vaccine that targets new COVID-19 variant
					

Novavax Inc said on Friday it had started working on a version of its COVID-19 vaccine to target the variant detected in South Africa and would have the shot ready for testing and manufacturing in the next few weeks.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 27, 2021)

Pfizer too.



> If this is the case, Pfizer and BioNTech expects "to be able to develop and produce a tailor-made vaccine against that variant in approximately 100 days, subject to regulatory approval".











						COVID-19: New vaccines 'ready in 100 days' if Omicron variant is resistant to current jabs, Pfizer says
					

Novavax added it has already started creating a COVID-19 vaccine based on the known genetic sequence of B.1.1.529 "and will have it ready to begin testing and manufacturing within the next few weeks".




					news.sky.com


----------



## 2hats (Nov 27, 2021)

Pfizer, like AstraZeneca, are currently only evaluating their present vaccines efficacy to omicron (are their official statements thus far).


----------



## 2hats (Nov 28, 2021)

Further steps towards correlates of protection (against infection), here a published study from Fred Hutch/Duke/Emory/Moderna/others for mRNA-1273.

From a sample of standard two-dose regimen individuals vaccine efficacies for given neutralisation titres were determined (note not third-dose boosted, which as previous work (eg Crotty et al) has indicated, looks like it generates a better quality of response).

Post-vaccination 50% neutralisation titres 10, 100, and 1000 had corresponding estimated vaccine efficacies of 78% (95%CI:54-89), 91% (95%CI:87-94), and 96% (95%CI:94-98). (Important note: neutralising antibodies, not binding antibodies).

These results are useful for performing immunogenic comparisons (immunobridging studies) between vaccines (particularly now that placebo controlled trials are unethical and/or there is insufficient sustained prevalence to conduct timely trials), rather than determining individual immunity/vaccination need (since they don't factor in individual medical history, risk, or cellular immunity response). The authors point out that a similar approach is regularly used for determining Influenza vaccine efficacy and selecting them for a given strain in a given season.
DOI: 10.1126/science.abm3425.




			
				TL;DR said:
			
		

> Some correlates of protection from infection for Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine have been determined. They could be used going forward to evaluate the potential of other vaccines and redesigned/multivalent vaccines targeting new variants of concern.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2021)

2hats said:


> Moderna have greenlit an omicron/B.1.1.529 vaccine candidate, mRNA-1273.529. They expect to have it ready for clinical testing within 60-90 days.
> 
> Novavax have also already started work on an omicron targeted version of their vaccine and expect to have that ready for testing and potential manufacture within a few weeks.
> 
> ...



Ah, lovely.  That will be a “we have a couple of new projects with super-aggressive timelines” email on Monday morning, them…

<not complaining  >


----------



## 2hats (Nov 28, 2021)

From the Netherlands (RIVM) a study of variation in post-vaccination infection risk by variant of concern.

Risk of infection was determined from analysis of 28+K sequenced samples collected March-August 2021 from individuals with known immune status:


> We find evidence for an increased risk of infection by the Beta (B.1.351), Gamma (P.1), or Delta (B.1.617.2) variants compared to the Alpha (B.1.1.7) variant after vaccination. No clear differences were found between vaccines. However, the effect was larger in the first 14-59 days after complete vaccination compared to 60 days and longer.



Note the sizeable confidence intervals.

The infection-mediated versus vaccine-mediated odds ratios _might_ suggest there are some protective immune responses to other epitopes (eg nucleocapsid, membrane, indeed other expressions of spike) and underscore maturation timing.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.11.24.21266735.




			
				TL;DR said:
			
		

> This study confirms a lower vaccine effectiveness against infection by delta, beta and gamma variants, compared to alpha. This effect was largest early after complete vaccination (difference in risk was less significant beyond 59 days post-dose-two). It may suggest advantages in mixing vaccinations and choosing optimal timing intervals of doses.


----------



## 2hats (Nov 29, 2021)

2hats said:


> Moderna have greenlit an omicron/B.1.1.529 vaccine candidate, mRNA-1273.529. They expect to have it ready for clinical testing within 60-90 days.


However the Moderna CEO thinks it will take "months" to start shipping a new variant vaccine.








						COVID-19 vaccine makers start work on Omicron-tailored shots
					

BioNTech, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson are working on vaccines that specifically target Omicron in case their existing shots are not effective against the new coronavirus variant, the companies said on Monday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 8ball (Nov 29, 2021)

2hats said:


> However the Moderna CEO thinks it will take "months" to start shipping a new variant vaccine.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yep, scaling up always takes a while.  They're gonna need a lot of the stuff.

It will def come out fast enough for the anti-vaxxers to go ape shit about it being "completely untested", though.


----------



## wemakeyousoundb (Nov 29, 2021)

8ball said:


> Yep, scaling up always takes a while.  They're gonna need a lot of the stuff.
> 
> It will def come out fast enough for the anti-vaxxers to go ape shit about it being "completely untested", though.


pre-experimental is the word on the street


----------



## 8ball (Nov 29, 2021)

wemakeyousoundb said:


> pre-experimental is the word on the street



Bloody hipsters!


----------



## 2hats (Nov 30, 2021)

From Germany (Erlangen and others), a study that (again) points to intranasal boosters, particularly as part of a mixed vaccination series, as potentially being the way forward.

Here a heterologous mRNA prime (actually low-dose BNT162b2) followed by an intranasal (Ad5) viral-vector boost in an animal model was found to promote very high levels of mucosal SARS-CoV-2 IgA protection. Likely this upper respiratory tract tissue immunity will greatly reduce the chances of infection and thus development of disease. It will also probably significantly reduce transmission too.

The regimen also induced high levels of lung-resident memory T cells and IgG antibodies, with broad neutralisation to a range of VOCs.
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-27063-4.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 1, 2021)

Under-dosing mutagenic antivirals, such as molnupiravir (for example - due to missed doses, incomplete courses, or low initial drug penetrance at the site of action), _may_ lead to sublethal mutagenesis and so accelerate within-host evolution of the virus, potentiating new variants of concern that enhance transmissibility or immune escape.

Details: 'Mutagenic antivirals: the evolutionary risk of low doses'

See also:








						FDA advisory panel narrowly endorses Merck's oral Covid treatment pill, despite reduced efficacy and safety questions
					

The FDA's Antimicrobial Drugs Advisory Committee voted 13 to 10 to recommend emergency authorization of molnupiravir, an oral antiviral drug to fight Covid.




					www.cnbc.com


----------



## elbows (Dec 1, 2021)

I wonder if thats what Whitty was referring to when he said on Saturday that they needed to review how they would use those drugs. And then of course Javid used such drugs as part of his 'reassuring' lets not shield the vulnerable comments in yesterdays press conference.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 2, 2021)

2hats said:


> Under-dosing mutagenic antivirals, such as molnupiravir (for example - due to missed doses, incomplete courses, or low initial drug penetrance at the site of action), _may_ lead to sublethal mutagenesis and so accelerate within-host evolution of the virus, potentiating new variants of concern that enhance transmissibility or immune escape.
> 
> Details: 'Mutagenic antivirals: the evolutionary risk of low doses'
> 
> ...


More commentary on this and thoughts on the limitations of use (ie prescribe only to high risk patients and mitigate risk for female patients who might be pregnant).
Rethinking Molnupiravir


----------



## 2hats (Dec 2, 2021)

> Novavax has initiated development of an Omicron-specific construct of its SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein (rS) antigen, currently in use in NVX-CoV2373. The initial steps required to manufacture an Omicron-specific spike are underway and GMP *manufacturing in a commercial facility is anticipated in January 2022*. Lab-based assessment of a new strain-matched nanoparticle vaccine will begin within a few weeks.











						Novavax Statement on Omicron Variant Response
					

Novavax is rapidly responding to the emergence of the latest potential threat of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant of concern (VoC). The company is executing a two-pronged variant...




					ir.novavax.com
				




Meanwhile EMA rolling review of Valneva's inactivated whole virus vaccine, VLA2001, begins.




__





						EMA starts rolling review of Valneva’s COVID-19 vaccine (VLA2001) - European Medicines Agency
					

EMA starts rolling review of Valneva’s COVID-19 vaccine (VLA2001)




					www.ema.europa.eu


----------



## 2hats (Dec 3, 2021)

Phase 2 trial COV-BOOST results for mixing third dose boosters have been published. Individuals who had had the standard two-dose regimens of either AstraZeneca AZD1222 or Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 were third dose boosted with one of Novavax NVX-CoV2373, Valneva VLA2001, J&J/Janssen Ad26.COV2.S, Moderna mRNA1273 or CureVac CVnCov, at 10-12 weeks after dose 2 (<<6 months).

All vaccine boosters raised antibody and neutralising immune responses in original two-dose AZD1222 recipients. All vaccine boosters except VLA2001 raised antibody and neutralising immune responses in original two-dose BNT162b2 recipients. NVX-CoV2373 appeared to induce a T cell response comparable to that of BNT162b2. Unfortunately immunogenicity data are only available for up to one month after dose 3, so far.
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02717-3.

Summary thread from the study lead.









						UK study finds mRNA COVID-19 vaccines provide biggest booster impact
					

COVID-19 vaccines made by Pfizer and Moderna that use mRNA technology provide the biggest boost to antibody levels when given 10-12 weeks after the second dose, a new British study has found.




					www.reuters.com
				




It would be interesting to re-examine the neutralising activity of sera from these individuals after 3 and 6 months.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 3, 2021)

From KCL a study of (delta/B.1.617.2) breakthrough infection (BTI) immunoresponses in vaccinees, comparing them to (delta) infections in the unvaccinated, so adding to the 'other side' of the hybrid immunity picture.





Post-infection vaccinee sera were far better able to neutralise all VOCs (even beta/B.1.351) than the unvaccinated whose sera neutralised delta less well and the other VOCs relatively poorly.


> Rapid production of Spike-reactive IgG was observed in the vaccinated group providing evidence of effective vaccine priming. Overall, potent cross-neutralizing activity against current SARS–CoV–2 variants of concern was observed in the BTI group compared to the infection group.


This research underlines how hybrid immunity significantly enhances immunoresponse affinity/avidity/breadth.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.01.21266982.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 3, 2021)

From Imperial (and others) a study, based on UK healthcare worker data, that highlights how the type and pattern of exposure to different VOC, antigenic imprinting, in vaccinees modulates the subsequent immunoresponse to a range of VOCs.

For example, here infection with alpha/B.1.1.7 then vaccination was found to induce reduced neutralising titres compared to infection with early-type WT then vaccination.



> Neutralization potency against VOCs changed with heterologous virus encounter and number of antigen exposures. Neutralization potency fell differentially depending on targeted VOCs over 5-months from the second vaccine dose. Heterologous combinations of spike encountered during infection and vaccination shape subsequent cross-protection against VOC, with implications for future-proof next-generation vaccines.
> 
> The indication is that the phenomenon of enhanced vaccine responses by infection, which has been reproducibly described by us and others, is less effective if the infection involves heterologous spike from a VOC.


This research points to the potential complications of "over specialising" forthcoming vaccines, ie tuning them to one particularly troublesome VOC at the expensive of VOCs as yet unseen; degrees of _original antigenic sin_. A universal coronavirus vaccine needs to very carefully select antigens to optimise for cross-reactivity.
DOI: 10.1126/science.abm0811.

(Cf previously noted work on mapping the antigenic distance between VOCs and implications for [spike] antigen selection for future vaccines.)

'Mainstream' press (TL;DR):








						How someone first encounters Covid ‘shapes their future immune response’
					

Researchers say their findings may have implications for the development of future coronavirus vaccines.




					www.standard.co.uk


----------



## 2hats (Dec 3, 2021)

(And not entirely unrelated to the previous post... another step towards a universal coronavirus vaccine.)

An announcement of phase I trials of DIOSynVax's pan-sarbeco coronavirus DNA plasmid vaccine candidate, pEVAC-PS.

It aims to target all coronaviruses through focusing on expressing modified non-spike antigens common to all coronaviridae, selecting carefully to avoid triggering unintentional hyper-inflammatory responses. It has already demonstrated good cross-reactive promise to a number of sarbecoviruses in animal models.

This DNA vaccine comes in freeze-dried powder form, so can be stored at room temperature and administered intradermally by a needle-free 'jet'.










						Cambridge-developed SARS-CoV-2 vaccine receives £1.9million from UK government for clinical trial
					

A Cambridge-developed vaccine candidate against SARS-CoV-2 could begin clinical trials in the UK in late autumn or early next year, thanks to a £1.9million




					www.cam.ac.uk


----------



## 2hats (Dec 4, 2021)

2hats said:


> Phase 2 trial COV-BOOST results ... All vaccine boosters except VLA2001 raised antibody and neutralising immune responses...
> 
> It would be interesting to re-examine the neutralising activity of sera from these individuals after 3 and 6 months.


Comment from Valneva:


> The setting in this study leads us to believe that COV-Boost does not allow any conclusions to be reached regarding the use of VLA2001 as a booster in a real-life setting.
> 
> Valneva believes it is likely that the short interval between the second shot and booster shot could have adversely impacted the results for VLA2001, given that a longer interval is generally required for inactivated vaccines.











						Valneva says no conclusions should be drawn on its vaccine from UK booster study
					

French biotech firm Valneva said on Friday no conclusions should be drawn on the effectiveness of its COVID-19 vaccine by a British study, which found it was the only shot out of seven that offered no immunity boost when given to people previously immunized with Pfizer's vaccine.




					www.reuters.com
				




Additionally, Valneva's own press release states that they expect homologous booster data in 1Q2022 and that they are co-ordinating a separate heterologous booster trial with a dose 2-3 interval of at least six months.




__





						Valneva Comments on COV-Boost Clinical Trial Data - Valneva
					

Saint Herblain (France), December 3, 2021 – Valneva SE (Nasdaq: VALN; Euronext Paris: VLA), a specialty vaccine company, today responded to data published from the COV-Boost COVID-19 vaccine trial, which investigated the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of seven different COVID-19 vaccines at...




					valneva.com


----------



## 2hats (Dec 4, 2021)

(DFTK, Tübingen) A small (n=36, ages 18-80 years) phase I trial of a peptide-based T cell vaccine, CoVac-1.

No adverse reactogenic events were observed. SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses (T-helper CD4+ and CD8+) targeting multiple vaccine peptides were induced in all study participants and interferon-γ T cell responses persisted in the follow-up analyses, exceeding both post-infection and approved vaccine responses.
  
Further (phase II) trials are anticipated to evaluate this vaccine candidate for patients with B cell/antibody deficiency.
DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-04232-5.

Some background:








						Corona vaccine for people with cancer and immune deficiencies in clinical trials
					

Doctors at Tübingen University Hospital in Germany develop a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 for patients with cancer or immune deficiencies.




					innovationorigins.com
				




See also previously post #1555 for another T cell vaccine candidate.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 7, 2021)

Further results from the Com-COV2 study. Here a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial examining safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of heterologous vaccine regimens namely mRNA-1273 and NVX-CoV2373 as second-dose vaccines for people (50+ years, n~1000) who received a first dose of AZD1222 or BNT162b2 8-12 weeks prior, as well as comparing them to the approved homologous two-dose regimens.

Reactogenicity in heterologous schedules of viral vector then mRNA vaccine increased compared to the standard homologous schedules, but not where NVX-CoV2373 was the second dose.


All immunogenic outcomes are from samples taken at 28 days post second dose. mRNA-1273 as a heterologous boost after AZD1222 or BNT162b2 prime induced a higher binding and neutralising antibody response than either standard homologous schedule. NVX-CoV2373 after AZD1222 prime was superior to the standard homologous AZD1222 regimen (for both humoral and cellular immunity). NVX-CoV2373 after BNT162b2 did not induce higher binding antibody titres compared to standard homologous BNT162b2; however those titres still exceeded those produced by standard homologous AZD1222. Drops in neutralising antibody responses to beta/B.1.351 and delta/B.1.617.2 VOC were seen across all schedules, whereas T cell responses were not affected. Notably, the greatest T cell response was seen in the AZD1222/NVX-CoV2373 schedule.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02718-5.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 8, 2021)

Statement from Pfizer/BioNTech on omicron/B.1.1.529 and their initial neutralisation study results (note: pseudovirus).


> Preliminary laboratory studies demonstrate that three doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine neutralize the Omicron variant (B.1.1.529 lineage) while two doses show significantly reduced neutralization titers
> Data indicate that a third dose of BNT162b2 increases the neutralizing antibody titers by 25-fold compared to two doses against the Omicron variant; titers after the booster dose are comparable to titers observed after two doses against the wild-type virus which are associated with high levels of protection
> As 80% of epitopes in the spike protein recognized by CD8+ T cells are not affected by the mutations in the Omicron variant, two doses may still induce protection against severe disease
> The companies continue to advance the development of a variant-specific vaccine for Omicron and expect to have it available by March in the event that an adaption is needed to further increase the level and duration of protection – with no change expected to the companies’ four billion dose capacity for 2022







__





						Pfizer and BioNTech Provide Update on Omicron Variant | Pfizer
					

Preliminary laboratory studies demonstrate that three doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine neutralize the Omicron variant (B.1.1.529 lineage) while two doses show significantly reduced neutralization titers Data indicate that a third dose of BNT162b2 increases the neutralizing antibody...




					www.pfizer.com


----------



## 2hats (Dec 9, 2021)

Following on from Pfizer/BioNTech (post #1585), a summary of three other small omicron vaccine neutralisation studies announced in the past ~24 hours.

Live omicron virus neutralisation assay results (AHRI/KZN, Durban) performed with BNT162b2 vaccine induced sera. The apparent raw neutralisation reduction is around 40-fold compared to earlier type D614G. This new VOC appears to still be using the ACE2 receptor. Omicron does not escape from hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination, in that order), which may not be surprising as this a not untypical fold-advantage hybrid immunity exhibits over non-convalesecent two-dose vaccine induced immunity, in otherwise healthy individuals. This _may_ suggest that a three-dose vaccination regimen could provide sufficient antibody protection. No T cell analysis.

DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.08.21267417.

Omicron lentiviral pseudovirus neutralisation assay results (Karolinska, Sweden). Up to a 25-fold reduction in neutralisation titres was observed across cohorts of blood donors and healthcare workers. They also found that a WHO neutralisation standard, used to standardise their assays, exhibited a 40-fold loss of neutralisation to omicron relative to early type. This preliminary report did not clarify which donors were convalsecent only, vaccinee only or hybrid.


A more comprehensive live omicron virus neutralisation study (Goethe, Germany) examining various vaccine induced sera, from both two-dose and three-dose regimens (each cohort of 10-20 individuals, variously ages 20-93 years).

Poor neutralisation against delta/B.1.617.2 and no efficacy against omicron/B.1.1.529 were observed using sera from heterologous two-dose AZD1222/BNT162b2 vaccinated individuals. BNT162b2-boosted individuals showed a significant increase of neutralising antibody titres but a ~27-fold reduction (relative to delta) in neutralisation against omicron (2 weeks post third dose). Neutralisation of omicron by double BNT162b2 convalescent vaccinees exhibited a ~33-fold reduction; though note that the median age of this particular convalescent vaccinee cohort was 88 years (range 68-93 years) and the majority were infected after vaccination (hybrid response unlikely to be as strong as for younger convalescent cohorts who were infected well in advance of vaccination). The most effective vaccination regimen was two-dose mRNA-1273 boosted by BNT162b2, with a ~23-fold reduction (relative to delta) in neutralisation against omicron (note: measured at only 2 weeks post third dose).

Additionally, whilst the monoclonal antibodies imdevimab and casirivimab efficiently prevented delta infection, they failed to neutralise omicron. This study did not analyse T cell responses.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.07.21267432.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 9, 2021)

Very preliminary data from a further neutralisation study (Medizinische Universität, Innsbruck). Details a little lacking right now but apparently live virus neutralisation assays.

All two-dose homologous schedules and convalescent immunity performed poorly at neutralising omicron/B.1.1.529. The best performing two-dose vaccination schedule was heterologous AZD1222/BNT162b2.

It would appear these results point to hybrid immunity ("super immune") apparently yielding the best neutralising results with infection-then-vaccination superior to vaccination-then-infection (seemingly consistent with Crotty's earlier speculations). Note that some of the results may (as in other small numbers studies mentioned in the last couple of posts) be confounded to degrees by age(/immunocompetence) of some study participants.




No preprint yet.

e2a: Lead author confirms that BNT162b2 vaccinees were sampled 1 month after second dose, whereas mRNA-1273 vaccinees were sampled 4-5 months after second dose (likely has a bearing on the former seemingly outperforming the latter, contrary to almost every previous study observation).


----------



## Badgers (Dec 9, 2021)

Not a treatment as such but a good idea 









						Japanese scientists develop glowing masks to detect coronavirus - The Mainichi
					

KYOTO (Kyodo) -- A team of scientists at a university in western Japan has developed masks that glow when exposed to ultraviolet light if they contain




					mainichi.jp


----------



## 2hats (Dec 10, 2021)

From the UKHSA 'SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and variants under investigation in England, Technical briefing 31, 10 December 2021'.


> The Variant Technical Group reviewed the available neutralisation data from published international and internal UK studies (UK Health Security Agency, University of Oxford). UK data will be published as soon as possible and cited here when available. Across 5 preliminary live virus studies (3 international and 2 UK), there was a 20- to 40-fold reduction in neutralising activity by Pfizer 2-dose vaccinee sera for Omicron compared to early pandemic viruses. There was at least 10 fold loss of activity when compared to Delta; in both UK studies this was over 20 fold. A greater reduction in activity was seen for AZ 2-dose sera, and for a high proportion of such sera, neutralising activity fell below the limit of quantification in the assay. An mRNA booster dose resulted in an increase in neutralising activity irrespective of primary vaccination type, including an increase in the proportion of samples that were above the limit of quantification. This is true regardless of which vaccine was used for the primary course. These data are from the early period after the booster and data are urgently required on the durability of neutralising activity.


(Very early) estimates of vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 due to the omicron/B.1.1.529 variant were made using a test negative case control study and compared to that due to delta/B.1.617.2, ie a real world epidemiological estimate, rather than a lab based neutralisation study. The final analysis included 56,439 delta and 581 omicron cases.

Original two-dose homologous AZD1222 regimen exhibits zero percent vaccine effectiveness to symptomatic infection by omicron. Original two-dose homologous BNT162b2 regimen exhibits ~30 percent vaccine effectiveness to symptomatic infection by omicron. A third dose of BNT162b2 raises vaccine effectiveness to symptomatic infection by omicron to around 70-75%.

Note: small study participant numbers lead to wide confidence intervals (and particularly the ~0% estimate for AZD1222).

e2a: Part of the data and analysis (for delta) available in this UKHSA/NIHR preprint.

2e2a: Omicron neutralisation data (Oxford) provided in this brief preprint - DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.10.21267534.


----------



## elbows (Dec 10, 2021)

Yeah thats stuff is important so I'm just in the middle of sticking it in the Omicron thread.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 12, 2021)

2hats said:


> Very preliminary data from a further neutralisation study (Medizinische Universität, Innsbruck). Details a little lacking right now but apparently live virus neutralisation assays.


(Short) preprint of the study now available. Small study size (7-20 participants in each cohort). Note that delta/B.1.617.2 sera donors were all young (<=30 years) whilst beta/B.1.351 donors where predominately elderly (60-90 years). All other cohorts had a reasonable spread of ages (~20-90years). All the previously infected vaccinees were single dose recipients.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.08.21267491.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 12, 2021)

Jerusalem Post reporting an Israeli (Sheba) neutralisation study (of 40 healthcare workers; half double dosed 5-6 months ago and half treble dosed). This found that three shots of BNT162b2 are four times less effective against omicron/B.1.1.529 than against delta/B.1.617.2 (at one month post third dose). However that third dose was found at one month to boost levels around 100-fold over the two-dose regimen at 5-6 months. The Ministry of Health is considering recommending people get a third dose after an interval of 3 months.

e2a: slide from MoH presentation. Live virus assay. 20-fold reduction in neutralisation for original BNT162b2 two-dose regimen versus omicron compared to early wild-type. 9-fold reduction in neutralisation for BNT162b2 three-dose regimen versus omicron compared to early wild-type. No details on timings and cohort demographics.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 12, 2021)

An extensive longitudinal study (UMontreal and others) of the variation of humoral immunoresponse between both convalescent (27 persons infected 4-12 months prior to first dose) and non-convalescent individuals (26) who have been vaccinated (original two-dose regimen) with BNT162b2 at short (~4 week; range 3-5 weeks) and long (~16 week; range 11-19 weeks) intervals. 12 of the convalescents received only one dose of BNT162b2. Age range of participants was 21-65 years.

Neutralisation was measured with a lentivirus based pseudovirus assay and immunoresponse characterised further with an antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity assay.

Key points from this study:

replicated hybrid immunity results seen in several previous studies
demonstrated second dose for hybrid antibody response was not necessary though it did reduce heterogeneity in immunoresponses on a shorter timescale; first dose achieves high antibody potency and breadth (note: this says nothing about whether a second dose might influence cellular responses)
hybrids were observed to have strong immunoresponses to previously unencountered VOCs
hybrid immunoresponse waned less quickly than that of naive vaccinees, remaining relatively stable for at least 8 months
the long dose interval improved immunoresponse for two-dose naives, but most importantly greatly improved neutralisation to VOCs, compared to the short dose interval - IgG RBD avidity suggested that this longer interval facilitates maturation of B cells in the germinal centre
notably IgA was significantly higher in convalescents post-vaccination (with implications for infection and transmission reduction)
the results might suggest that there could be advantage in a suitably long interval to a third (booster) dose for previous naive two-dose short interval vaccinees - improving neutralisation breadth to VOCs
irrespective of dosing interval, convalescent vaccinees exhibited enhanced degrees of cross-reactivity to other coronaviridae (HKU1, SARS-CoV) that naive vaccines did not
 
 

DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2021.12.004

TL;DR:


> Previously infected individuals appear to only need one mRNA vaccine dose to produce strong, robust immunity. A longer dosing interval for the previously uninfected significantly improves their immune response. Antibodies wane sooner in previously uninfected vaccinees compared to convalescents.


This paper is discussed in TWiV 839 (from 30 minutes in).


(UBC) A larger study (186 paramedics, aged 33-45 years) also looked into short (~4 week) and long (~6-7 week) dosing intervals covering both BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 mirrors the previous results. Sampling was around 2 months post second dose. Assays were standard commercial offerings (Roche, MSD). Attempts were made to screen out convalescents.


> A SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dosing interval of 6–7 weeks compared with a standard dosing interval (<4 weeks) resulted in higher anti-spike antibodies detected in the blood of vaccinated individuals.



DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciab938.


----------



## elbows (Dec 12, 2021)

I think the link to the first paper might be mangled.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 12, 2021)

From Rockefeller, NY, a study of the plasma neutralisation properties of omicron/B.1.1.529 and comparison with their earlier PMS20 polymutant (see post #352, on the mutations thread).

Sera from both convalescents and non-convalescents, some also vaccinees receiving either three-dose mRNA (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) or single-dose Ad26.COV2.S (J&J), were evaluated using a HIV-1 based pseudovirus assay.

Whilst sera from convalescents, single-dose J&J and two-dose naive vaccines failed to neutralise both PMS20 and omicron, that from vaccinated convalescents and three-dose naive vaccines (third dose given at >6 months, sera sampled at 1 month after last vaccine dose) both demonstrated substantial neutralisation (as previously, hybrid immunity yields the most strongest immunoresponse). Neutralisation trajectories of vaccinated convalescents and responses of convalescent-only underline the need for previously infected individuals to receive at least one vaccine dose.



Co-PI summary thread.

Early preprint.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 12, 2021)

elbows said:


> I think the link to the first paper might be mangled.


Sorry. Now fixed.


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 13, 2021)

Presumably this kind of data is what is pushing the drive for people to take the booster? Might the country also not do as badly as some others due to higher levels of ‘hybrid immunity’ due to Delta having been allowed to rip through the population?


----------



## 2hats (Dec 14, 2021)

(MIT/Harvard and others) A (pseudovirus) neutralisation study (239 individuals, ages 18-78, median age of each sub-group 34-46 years, a mixture of healthcare workers and wider community). Here examining the potency of sera from mRNA-1273, BNT162b, and Ad26.COV2.S vaccinees, some of each convalescents, some with and without boosters, some vaccinated recently (<3 months), some in the 'distant' past (6-12 months ago), in respect of various VOC including omicron.

Third dose boosted individuals exhibited the least reduction in neutralisation (compared to early wild-type), namely around 4 to 6-fold. They state:


> mRNA vaccine booster induces potent neutralizing responses against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant that are low-to-absent in non-boosted vaccinees.



 
Importantly, note that the omicron pseudovirus here did not feature R346K (eg as seen in the Sigal study).

In particular, they comment:


> Although the emergence of variants has catalyzed the development of variant-specific booster shots to increase variant neutralization, our results suggest that current wild type-based mRNA vaccines are sufficient to stimulate cross-reactive humoral responses greater than might have been anticipated. Whether this is the result of booster timing (in most cases >6 months after vaccination) or because the primary series was simply insufficient to fully stimulate B cell responses against each of the possible epitopes on the spike antigen is unclear.





> Our results would suggest that these recipients of Ad26.COV2.S vaccines may benefit from additional mRNA vaccine doses with the potential to further raise titers and broaden their neutralizing activity.



Unfortunately this study did not distinguish previously-infected separately as infected-then-vaccinated or vaccinated-then-infected. Notable though is a hint of consistent clustering of results in convalescent vaccinees. Speculation: perhaps suggestive of a dichotomy arising from infected-then-vaccinated versus vaccinated-then-infected ('breakthrough' infection) participants. This would be consistent with similar recent studies (infected-then-vaccinated hybrid immunity easily on a par with immunity induced by a three-dose boosted mRNA course) and Crotty's thoughts.

Besides highlighting the need for non-convalescents to receive a third dose booster, it would hint that vaccinated then infected individuals would also benefit from such an additional dose.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.14.21267755.

Author commentary thread.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 14, 2021)

Dogsauce said:


> Presumably this kind of data is what is pushing the drive for people to take the booster? Might the country also not do as badly as some others due to higher levels of ‘hybrid immunity’ due to Delta having been allowed to rip through the population?


Any degree of prior immunity will tend to soften outcomes (which is likely what is being seen in South Africa, though twinned with a much younger demographic). However, as per recent studies, infection following two-dose vaccination of the previously seronaive possibly not as effective as either infection prior to vaccination or adequately timed three dose mRNA/heterologous series with mRNA booster.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 14, 2021)

2hats said:


> Jerusalem Post reporting an Israeli (Sheba) neutralisation study (of 40 healthcare workers; half double dosed 5-6 months ago and half treble dosed). This found that three shots of BNT162b2 are four times less effective against omicron/B.1.1.529 than against delta/B.1.617.2 (at one month post third dose). However that third dose was found at one month to boost levels around 100-fold over the two-dose regimen at 5-6 months. The Ministry of Health is considering recommending people get a third dose after an interval of 3 months.
> 
> e2a: slide from MoH presentation. Live virus assay. 20-fold reduction in neutralisation for original BNT162b2 two-dose regimen versus omicron compared to early wild-type. 9-fold reduction in neutralisation for BNT162b2 three-dose regimen versus omicron compared to early wild-type. No details on timings and cohort demographics.


Preprint of this live virus study is now available.


> We analyzed the neutralization efficiency against wild-type, Beta, Delta and Omicron VOC. Limitations of the study include the small cohort tested and this test being only an in-vitro assay. Yet, we demonstrate low neutralization efficiency against delta and wild-type for vaccines with more than 5 months following the second BNT162b2 dose, with no neutralization efficiency against Omicron. We demonstrate the importance of a third dose, by showing a 100-fold increase in neutralization efficiency of Omicron following a third dose, with a 4-fold reduced neutralization compared to that against the Delta VOC. The durability of the effect of the third dose is yet to be determined.


DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.13.21267670.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 15, 2021)

Two more omicron/B.1.1.529 vaccine neutralisation studies.

From Cologne a pseudo virus assay based study of 30 non-convalescent individuals (median age 49, range 27-78 years) vaccinated with the standard two-dose BNT162b2 regimen. Samples were collected at various time points and again after a third dose booster. Additionally 30 convalescents (median age 52, range 22-68 years) were sampled up to a year after infection and again after a single dose of BNT162b2. The advantages of hybrid immunity and three-dose regimens, in neutralising omicron, seen in previous studies were reproduced.

DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.14.21267769.

From Australia (various NSW institutes/hospitals) a small live virus assay study (10 individuals, median age 59 years, range 34-65). One vaccine naive, nine two-dose BNT162b2 and four three-dose BNT162b2 (6 month 2nd-3rd dosing interval). No prior infection for any participants.

Interestingly they made an observation of delays in omicron growth in vitro which _might_ suggest that omicron's "mutational changes may negatively affect viral fitness" and _could_ have implications for incubation period and viral shedding window.

DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.12.472252.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 15, 2021)

From HKU another omicron vaccine neutralisation study. This time sera from BNT162b2 and CoronaVac double-dosed vaccinees (Sinovac's CoronaVac is an inactivated virus vaccine) - 25 individuals of each (median age 48, range 23-61 years). The neutralisation assay was live virus based (performed in a BSL-3), testing against omicron/B.1.1.529 and B.1.1.529+R346K, amongst others.

The study concluded that omicron escapes all neutralisation by standard dosing of CoronaVac and BNT162b2 neutralises it very poorly. The R346K mutation did not appear to significantly affect results.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.13.21267668.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 15, 2021)

Phase 3 trial results for Medicago's CoVLP plant-based, virus-like particle, COVID-19 vaccine (two intramuscular doses, 3 weeks apart, storable at standard refrigeration temperatures). 24,000+ participants from six countries, in North America, Latin America, and Europe, aged 18+.

CoVLP is created via a molecular farming technique - by engineering a bacterium with genes of the target virus, then introducing that into a tobacco plant (Nicotiana benthamiana) where the virus-like particles are produced in the leaves, from which they can be harvested, extracted and prepared.

Overall vaccine efficacy for CoVLP against all SARS-CoV-2 variants was 71% (95%CI:58.7-80.0). Amongst confirmed previously-uninfected this was 75.6% (95%CI:64.2-83.7). The vaccine candidate demonstrated efficacy of 75.3% (95%CI:52.8-87.9) against COVID-19 of any severity due to delta/B.1.617.2. Efficacy was 88.6% (95%CI:74.6-95.6) against the gamma/P.1. Omicron/B.1.1.529 was not in circulation at the time of this trial. No related serious adverse events were reported and reactogenicity was generally mild to moderate and transient.

Based on these results, Medicago are seeking regulatory approval for CoVLP from Health Canada.








						Medicago and GSK announce positive Phase 3 efficacy and safety results for adjuvanted plant-based COVID-19 vaccine candidate | Medicago
					

Medicago and GSK announce positive efficacy and safety results from the global Phase 3 study of Medicago’s plant-based COVID-19 vaccine candidate




					medicago.com


----------



## Riklet (Dec 15, 2021)

2hats based on the various studies and data youve posted, what would your take be on booster vaccine timescale for a double jabbed covid convalescent (pre vaccination).

My situation -

Covid in March 2020 and long covid since (much better in past 6 months).
Pfizer vaccine mid June and second end of August.
Booster jab booked for end of December (4 months).

Unsure whether to get the booster in the next few days at a walk in. Or wait til end of month. Or even wait longer. Obviously Omicrom spread is making me consider another jab asap...


----------



## prunus (Dec 15, 2021)

Riklet said:


> 2hats based on the various studies and data youve posted, what would your take be on booster vaccine timescale for a double jabbed covid convalescent (pre vaccination).
> 
> My situation -
> 
> ...



I am not 2hats but in case my opinion is of value: get it done now ASAP.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 15, 2021)

prunus said:


> I am not 2hats but in case my opinion is of value: get it done now ASAP.



Opinion verified.


----------



## platinumsage (Dec 15, 2021)

Riklet said:


> 2hats based on the various studies and data youve posted, what would your take be on booster vaccine timescale for a double jabbed covid convalescent (pre vaccination).
> 
> My situation -
> 
> ...



Put it this way. If you end up in hospital with covid and they ask if you had your booster yet, and you reply that no, you were deliberately delaying it based on what you read on the internet, you’d be met with lots of  and


----------



## 2hats (Dec 15, 2021)

Riklet said:


> 2hats based on the various studies and data youve posted, what would your take be on booster vaccine timescale for a double jabbed covid convalescent (pre vaccination).
> 
> My situation -
> 
> ...


IANAD and have no idea of your full medical history and degree of immunocompetence. If you want a booster then go get one (dose interval timing likely matters less for infected-then-vaxed from the point of view of disease). The dose will temporarily ramp up your circulating antibodies (and short-term boost homed mucosal IgA) but isn't likely to improve on the hybrid immunity that you probably already have (to VOCs and development of severe disease).


----------



## 2hats (Dec 15, 2021)

(Australia/SA) An early meta-analysis of preliminary omicron/B.1.1.529 neutralisation studies as an attempt to determine vaccine efficacy.


> Six months after primary immunisation with an mRNA vaccine, efficacy for Omicron is estimated to have waned to around 40% against symptomatic and 80% against severe disease. A booster dose with an existing mRNA vaccine (even though it targets the ancestral spike) has the potential to raise *efficacy* to *86.2%* (95% CI: 75.4-92.9) (*symptomatic*) and *98.2%* (95% CI 90.9-99.7) (*severe*) against Omicron.


These estimates demonstrate good concordance with the epidemiological evidence presented in the recent UKHSA TNCC study.
 
DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.13.21267748.


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 15, 2021)

Riklet said:


> 2hats based on the various studies and data youve posted, what would your take be on booster vaccine timescale for a double jabbed covid convalescent (pre vaccination).
> 
> My situation -
> 
> ...


I'm in the interesting situation of having had covid in 2020, had long covid since, got AZ first which made my LC worse, got Pfizer as second jab, then last Friday I got the Moderna booster, and on Monday I tested positive for covid by LFT, symptoms (and location in south London) suggesting it is the omicron variant. So this week I've got the Moderna jab and omicron variant doing battle in my long covid-wracked body 

My symptoms are all very mild as it happens and we'll just have to see the long term effects. But I'm glad I got the booster, in part because having a jab close to catching covid is now thought to reduce long covid risk. What that means for someone already with long covid is beyond the reach of current research and statistics I suspect, but I feel glad to have got the jab anyway.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 15, 2021)

prunus said:


> I am not 2hats but in case my opinion is of value: get it done now ASAP.


This 100% ^


----------



## Supine (Dec 15, 2021)

Brainaddict said:


> I'm in the interesting situation of having had covid in 2020, had long covid since, got AZ first which made my LC worse, got Pfizer as second jab, then last Friday I got the Moderna booster, and on Monday I tested positive for covid by LFT, symptoms (and location in south London) suggesting it is the omicron variant. So this week I've got the Moderna jab and omicron variant doing battle in my long covid-wracked body
> 
> My symptoms are all very mild as it happens and we'll just have to see the long term effects. But I'm glad I got the booster, in part because having a jab close to catching covid is now thought to reduce long covid risk. What that means for someone already with long covid is beyond the reach of current research and statistics I suspect, but I feel glad to have got the jab anyway.



Go Moderna, fuck you omicron


----------



## elbows (Dec 16, 2021)

Big real-world molnupiravir trial has begun in the UK, although expectations for this treatment arent quite what they once were.



> *The first at-home treatment for Covid has been given to patients in the UK as part of a major national study. *
> 
> Molnupiravir will be tested on 10,000 people at risk of serious illness in research led by University of Oxford.
> 
> ...











						Covid: First UK patients given take-at-home pill
					

The tablet - molnupiravir - is given twice a day to high-risk patients who have caught the virus.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## 2hats (Dec 16, 2021)

Valneva have released further booster data for their inactivated vaccine VLA2001. This is for a homologous boost of VLA2001 given 7-8 months after the primary vaccination course (participants aged 18-55 years).

The third (high) dose booster elicited a strong response irrespective of the primary course dosing regimen (participants received low/medium/high doses; 3/7/35 AU of antigen) resulting in an IgG geometric mean titre of 9699.3 (95%CI:8497.76-11070.71), which was 42- to 106-fold that prior to the booster, two weeks after the third dose. This was itself four times higher than the response two weeks after completing the primary series.

Evaluation of neutralisation of VOCs, including omicron, is underway.




__





						Valneva Announces Positive Homologous Booster Data for Inactivated, Adjuvanted COVID-19 Vaccine Candidate VLA2001 - Valneva
					

Initial results show excellent immune response after third dose of VLA2001 administered 7 to 8 months after the second dose of primary vaccination Antibody titers increased 42- to 106-fold two weeks after booster dose vs pre-booster levels Antibody titers four-fold higher compared to two weeks...




					valneva.com


----------



## Supine (Dec 16, 2021)

Looks like J&J is going the same way as AZ. Rare side effects mean the preference will be mRNA going forward.









						CDC advisory panel, concerned about rare side effects tied to J&J vaccine, gives preferential nod to mRNA shots
					

A panel that advises the CDC gave a rare preferential recommendation to the Covid vaccines based on messenger RNA technology on Thursday..




					www.statnews.com


----------



## 2hats (Dec 16, 2021)

More omicron/B.1.1.529 neutralisation studies.

(Institut Pasteur) A live virus study looking at convalescent and vaccines sera and monoclonal antibodies. Previous findings reproduced: omicron escapes neutralisation by pretty much all but one mAb (Sotrovimab). It also escapes two dose homologous BNT162b2 and AZD1222 (at 5 months) and convalescent sera (at 6 and 12 months). It was only neutralised by three-dose BNT162b2 (at 1 month) and convalescent hybrid immunity, with single dose BNT162b2 (at 1 month).
 
DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.14.472630.

(NIH/Duke/Moderna/others) A mRNA-1273 pseudovirus neutralisation study. Vaccinee sera from standard (100µg) two-dose recipients (4 weeks post second dose) saw a 49 to 84-fold reduction for omicron compared to earlier D614G type. A third (half) dose (50µg) booster (administered 9 months after dose 2) restored significant neutralising capability.

DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.15.21267805.


----------



## Supine (Dec 16, 2021)

Really good article with nice graphs. The state of play with vaccines summarised. 









						How COVID vaccines shaped 2021 in eight powerful charts
					

The extraordinary vaccination of more than four billion people, and the lack of access for many others, were major forces this year — while Omicron’s arrival complicated things further.




					www.nature.com


----------



## HAL9000 (Dec 16, 2021)

Supine said:


> Really good article with nice graphs. The state of play with vaccines summarised.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Its about the level I can understand, thanks 

When we get more data about omicron, it will be interesting to see how good Oxford–AstraZeneca is at stopping hospitalisation and death.   Since a lot of people have received this vaccine.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 18, 2021)

Sputnik V news (no data yet). Third booster dose (of Sputnik Light) six months after original two-dose Sputnik V course claimed to neutralise omicron.








						Sputnik V booster strengthens Omicron defence, developer says
					

A booster shot of Russia's Sputnik Light vaccine provides a stronger antibody response against the Omicron variant of COVID-19 than the two-dose Sputnik V vaccine alone, the medicine's developer said on Friday.




					www.reuters.com
				











						Putin says Sputnik V coronavirus vaccine effective against Omicron  - RIA
					

Russia's Sputnik V coronavirus vaccine is effective against the Omicron variant, the RIA news agency cited President Vladimir Putin as saying on Friday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Dec 18, 2021)

Pfizer, commenting on interim trial results for paediatric BNT162b2, state that a two-dose 3µg course was apparently not as immunogenic in 2-4 year olds as previous data indicated it was in under-2s and older children. Pfizer will now investigate a three-dose course.

A clinical trial of an omicron-specific version of BNT162b2 is expected to start next month.








						Pfizer says pandemic could extend to 2024, vaccine data for younger children delayed
					

Pfizer Inc on Friday forecast that the COVID-19 pandemic would not be behind us until 2024 and said a lower-dose version of its vaccine for 2- to 4-year-olds generated a weaker immune response than expected, potentially delaying authorization.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Dec 18, 2021)

A letter (OHSU) reporting a small study of 'breakthrough' vaccination and hybrid immunity.

26 participants (mean age 38 years, convalescents screened out) who had been vaccinated with two-dose BNT162b2 and experienced infection around 210 days after the second dose. A control cohort of BNT162b2 vaccinees with no history of infection was matched to this for comparative purposes. Convalescent vaccinee samples were taken (on average) ~1 month after infection and ~7 months after vaccination; vaccinee only samples were taken ~1 month after last dose.
 
The study reproduced the previously seen jump in spike RBD, IgG titres and neutralising breadth to assorted VOC (live virus assay) that has been seen in other hybrid studies. All were significantly higher than in two-dose only vaccinees. In addition they measured IgA titres and found those to be significantly higher too - indeed in the vaccinee only cohort their IgA levels were barely above the lower limit of the assay. This last result highlights how the immune response is modulated by the route of exposure to antigen (and points to, as seen in other studies, how advantageous intranasal/oral vaccines _could_ prove to be).

Unfortunately they omitted comparative cohorts of convalescent vaccinees and a control of unvaccinated naives.
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2021.22898.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 19, 2021)

TWIV considers the cost-benefit of vaccinations in the light of J&J being almost out of the picture in the US due to the clotting issues- with effect on (AZ) vaccine uptake elsewhere ... through the lens of whether to vaccinate children (guest is a paediatrician)- plus scepticism about boosters for younger people - i.e. two doses quite likely sufficient if the aim is as belt and braces against serious disease ...


----------



## 2hats (Dec 20, 2021)

Latest study from LJI (Sette, Crotty, et al) looking into T cell responses and steps towards understanding those as correlates of various levels of protection (to infection, to disease, to severe disease, etc).

They quantified the T cell responses from some ~200 donors with varying infection and vaccination histories - grouped as: no infection nor vaccination (I-V-), infected/not vaccinated (I+V-), vaccinated only (V+I-), and infected then vaccinated (I+V+) aka 'hybrid'. By comparing the relative activity directed against spike with that directed at the rest of the viral proteome based on optimised pools of CD4 and CD8 epitopes they were able to define means of classifying each donor group. Vaccinees received either standard two-dose regimens of mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2. Donor groups' median ages ranged 25-42 years, overall age range 17-74 years.

Next they were able to classify the immunoresponse histories of a fresh group of donors with 85-90% accuracy.

T cell responses of vaccinated then infected 'breakthrough' donors, V+I+, were then assessed using this method. (Notably, all the breakthrough infection episodes were mild).
 
Whilst many of the V+I+ individuals exhibited similar T cell responses to I+V+ hybrids, outperforming I-V-/I+V-/V+I-, suggesting that both B and T cell responses were increased as a result of post vaccination infection, V+I+ 'breakthroughs' also featured a higher degree of heterogeneity in responses compared to I+V+, with around one-third exhibiting similarly lower CD4 responses of I+V- (unvaccinated convalescents), _perhaps_ indicative of vaccination tending to blunt the adaptive immune response to pathogen exposure (as it successfully moderates the disease).

Separately, this approach may prove to be a useful assay in helping accurately assess longitudinal vaccination studies.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.15.472874.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 20, 2021)

(Shanghai) An omicron/B.1.1.529 pseudovirus neutralisation study, involving 292 healthcare workers, for Sinopharm's BBIBP-CorV inactivated virus third-dose booster.

8-9 months after dose two in this homologous series SARS-CoV-2 specific antibody levels were found to have dropped significantly. Though they rose dramatically in the vast majority of participants at one month after a third dose booster and pseudovirus neutralisation of early-type jumped 6-fold (compared to levels one month after second dose), neutralisation activity to omicron dropped over 20-fold.


This study does not of course evaluate other aspects of adaptive immunity, and this type of vaccine may take longer than one month to develop an optimal immunogenic response in vaccinees.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.17.21267961.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 20, 2021)

Moderna announce preliminary 50µg and 100µg third-dose booster results for mRNA-1273 vaccines.

The authorised booster (50µg of mRNA-1273) increases omicron/B.1.1.529 neutralising antibody levels approximately 37-fold; a 100µg booster dose of mRNA-1273 increases omicron neutralising antibody levels approximately 83-fold (sampled at one month post-booster; both factors relative to pre-boost levels; pseudovirus assay). Multivalent vaccine candidates mRNA-1273.211 (WT+beta) and mRNA-1273.213 (WT+delta) were also tested at the same dosing levels and achieved similar levels of neutralisation.





Moderna will continue to advance an omicron-specific booster (mRNA-1273.529) to clinical trials early next year.





__





						Moderna Announces Preliminary Booster Data and Updates Strategy to Address Omicron Variant
					

Authorized booster (50 µg of mRNA-1273) increases Omicron neutralizing antibody levels approximately 37-fold; a 100 µg booster dose of mRNA-1273 increases Omicron neutralizing antibody levels approximately 83-fold M oderna will continue to advance an Omicron-specific booster ( mRNA-1273.529) to...




					investors.modernatx.com
				




A preprint is in work.


----------



## elbows (Dec 20, 2021)

Sotrovimab in the UK news:









						Covid: Vulnerable NHS patients to be offered new drug
					

The drug - sotrovimab - is given as an infusion to high-risk patients who have caught the virus.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 21, 2021)

elbows said:


> Sotrovimab in the UK news:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I had an email from the NHS today about a treatment they would offer me if testing positive, I guess it must be this.



Spoiler: Longish message from NHS






> ^20/12/2021
> 
> Your NHS number: xxxx
> 
> ...


----------



## 2hats (Dec 21, 2021)

The EMA has just recommended granting a conditional marketing authorisation for Novavax's adjuvanted protein-based recombinant vaccine, NVX-CoV2373, aka Nuvaxovid™. The EC has now granted that.

Separately, the WHO has granted NVX-CoV2373 Emergency Use Listing (EUL).


----------



## 2hats (Dec 24, 2021)

Novavax have released results for neutralisation results from phase 3 studies (2019nCoV-101 and PREVENT-19) of their adjuvanted protein subunit vaccine NVX-CoV2373.

The 5µg two-dose primary two-dose vaccination series was found to neutralise all VOCs early-type and all VOCs (beta, alpha, delta and omicron) at 35 days, with neutralisation further jumping substantially after a 5µg third-dose booster given at 6 months.







They also looked at immunoresponses in adolescents (12-17 years) who were given a 5µg two-dose primary series. They observed 100% seroconversion with high neutralising titres to early-type and all VOC( alpha, beta, delta, delta+, gamma, mu and omicron). Immunoresponses were 2-4 times higher than in adults.







Low reactogenicity reported.

They are on schedule to manufacture an omicron-specific vaccine next month.








						Novavax says COVID vaccine triggers immune response to Omicron variant
					

Novavax Inc's COVID-19 vaccine is effective in generating an immune response against the Omicron variant, according to early data published on Wednesday,suggesting that the U.S. drugmaker's existing COVID-19 vaccine can help combat the new Omicron variant.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Dec 29, 2021)

An extension of Sigal's recent work - a small study of 13 individuals which would appear to indicate that whilst persons infected by delta/B.1.617.2 are still susceptible to infection by omicron/B.1.1.529, a live virus neutralisation study of sera from vaccinees (either two-dose BNT162b2 or two-dose, ie boosted, Ad26.CoV2.S) infected by omicron (note: minus S:R346K) demonstrated noticeable degrees of neutralisation of delta.



> These results are consistent with Omicron displacing the Delta variant, since it can elicit immunity [note: in vaccinees] which neutralizes Delta making re-infection with Delta less likely. In contrast, Omicron escapes neutralizing immunity elicited by Delta  and therefore may re-infect Delta infected individuals. The implications of such displacement would depend on whether Omicron is indeed less pathogenic than Delta.


Caution: likely many of the participants in this study (South Africa) have been exposed to beta/B.1.351 some months previous. So it's not yet clear if exposure to omicron after vaccination confers cross-reactivity to delta, or it is activation of cross-reactivity due to some suitably spaced combination of two or all of prior beta/vaccine/omicron exposures. Likely multiple exposures, at sufficient intervals, to more diverse antigens (at least one of which is a dose of a vaccine) drive the neutralisation breadth to VOCs (as seen in hybrid studies).

Implications for the utility of omicron-spike based vaccines in providing greater breadth of cross-protection to other VOC.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.27.21268439.


----------



## elbows (Dec 30, 2021)




----------



## existentialist (Dec 30, 2021)

elbows said:


>



That's encouraging, except for the complacency it will undoubtedly foster in our political masters


----------



## l'Otters (Jan 1, 2022)

There seems to be mixed reception to this 
Tweet about Corbevax

Can’t pretend to understand the ramifications of any of the details right now but looks interesting & not found mention of it on this thread.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 1, 2022)

l'Otters said:


> There seems to be mixed reception to this
> Tweet about Corbevax


Load of hype and bollox.  Doesn't even pick up cat hairs.

Get yersen a Henry.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 1, 2022)

l'Otters said:


> There seems to be mixed reception to this
> Tweet about Corbevax
> 
> Can’t pretend to understand the ramifications of any of the details right now but looks interesting & not found mention of it on this thread.


For some potential issues see post #10468 in the worldwide thread.


----------



## Supine (Jan 1, 2022)

l'Otters said:


> There seems to be mixed reception to this
> Tweet about Corbevax
> 
> Can’t pretend to understand the ramifications of any of the details right now but looks interesting & not found mention of it on this thread.


Not one I’ve followed but AZ is produced license free so cost/profit hasn’t been a factor in its use.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 7, 2022)

Has anyone heard about Amantadine?
This has become particularly popular in Poland, following a recommendation to use it by a Polish doctor. in Poland people are buying it privately to treat Covid.
I've tried to find debunking articles but can't find anything other than articles stating clinal trials were under way last February (2020), but no results published.









						Evaluating Amantadine as a Potential Treatment for COVID-19
					

Amantadine, a treatment that was originally used as an agent against influenza A, lost efficacy due to viral resistance.



					www.pharmacytimes.com
				











						Sales of unproven Covid treatment soar in Poland’s least-vaccinated region
					

Amantadine, an unproven treatment for COVID-19, has been promoted by some doctors and a deputy government minister.




					notesfrompoland.com


----------



## LDC (Jan 7, 2022)

ska invita said:


> Has anyone heard about Amantadine?
> This has become particularly popular in Poland, following a recommendation to use it by a Polish doctor. in Poland people are buying it privately to treat Covid.
> I've tried to find debunking articles but can't find anything other than articles stating clinal trials were under way last February (2020), but no results published.
> 
> ...



You'd be bonkers to try anything that has not been given approval officially tbh. (E2A: I guess I mean 'one' not 'you' as wasn't aimed at you Ska.)

And when a piece uses sentences like this I'd dismiss the article completely.

"Dr. Wlodzimierz Bodnar, a pediatrician and pulmonologist, became sick with the virus and self-treated with amantadine. His symptoms began to subside within 48 hours of taking the medication."


----------



## ska invita (Jan 7, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> You'd be bonkers to try anything that has not been given approval officially tbh. (E2A: I guess I mean 'one' not 'you' as wasn't aimed at you Ska.)
> 
> And when a piece uses sentences like this I'd dismiss the article completely.
> 
> "Dr. Wlodzimierz Bodnar, a pediatrician and pulmonologist, became sick with the virus and self-treated with amantadine. His symptoms began to subside within 48 hours of taking the medication."



theres lots of other more clinical search results and its a pre-existing drug that is available
of course im very sceptical - but its strange not to be able to find a result of the clinical trials mentioned, but I guess it takes longer? or Im not finding them.


----------



## elbows (Jan 7, 2022)

ska invita said:


> Has anyone heard about Amantadine?
> This has become particularly popular in Poland, following a recommendation to use it by a Polish doctor. in Poland people are buying it privately to treat Covid.
> I've tried to find debunking articles but can't find anything other than articles stating clinal trials were under way last February (2020), but no results published.


Its a typical rehash of an old idea. If there is any real merit there, only proper trials can demonstrate it.

When I first got deep into learning about pandemics, it was when fears about H5N1 bird flu first emerged. And Amantadine was one of the existing drugs that some sought solace in, that doomers were tempted to stock up on with the idea they could use it to shield themselves from the worst effects of that flu should it go pandemic in humans.

I wouldnt recommend messing around with it, both because of the lack of evidence and also because of its effects on parts of our bodies which are probably hinted at via what it is currently used for in the world of medicine - parkinsonism. I dont believe in fucking around with the balance of those systems unless there is proven, specific benefit for a particular patient.


----------



## LDC (Jan 7, 2022)

ska invita said:


> theres lots of other more clinical search results and its a pre-existing drug that is available
> of course im very sceptical - but its strange not to be able to find a result of the clinical trials mentioned, but I guess it takes longer? or Im not finding them.




Just had a quick look, there is some stuff out there.









						Amantadine for COVID-19 - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov
					

Amantadine for COVID-19 - Full Text View.




					clinicaltrials.gov
				












						Amantadine Treatment for People with COVID-19
					

SARS-Cov-2, whose symptoms include difficulty swallowing, coughing, diarrhea, and breathing failure, has caused the loss of many lives around the world. In the absence of a vaccine or medication to help prevent or decrease the effects of the disease, ...




					www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
				




Wary though, this one is 15 patients in Mexico, observational and 'with symptoms of covid' ffs; Observational study of people infected with SARS-Cov-2, treated with amantadine - PubMed


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 7, 2022)

Once again, amazing that antivaxxers reject a very simple and elegant to all intents "natural" solution but jump on an actual "chemical" shotgun approach ...

I note that it is not recommended for those with prostate or cataract issues ...


----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 7, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> You'd be bonkers to try anything that has not been given approval officially tbh. (E2A: I guess I mean 'one' not 'you' as wasn't aimed at you Ska.)
> 
> And when a piece uses sentences like this I'd dismiss the article completely.
> 
> "Dr. Wlodzimierz Bodnar, a pediatrician and pulmonologist, became sick with the virus and self-treated with amantadine. His symptoms began to subside within 48 hours of taking the medication."


That ‘48 hours’ quote has been used more or less verbatim to plug the drug of choice of right wing grifters, Ivermectin, so that triggers my spider senses a bit.

Without suitably sized trials it’s just anecdata and most likely normal recovery in someone with a mild case.


----------



## wemakeyousoundb (Jan 8, 2022)

Dogsauce said:


> That ‘48 hours’ quote has been used more or less verbatim to plug the drug of choice of right wing grifters, Ivermectin, so that triggers my spider senses a bit.
> 
> Without suitably sized trials it’s just anecdata and most likely normal recovery in someone with a mild case.


I suspect doing absolutely nothing would have an even better survival rate in my anecdotal trials
report to follow


----------



## ska invita (Jan 12, 2022)

Cannabis could treat and prevent emerging Covid-19 variants
					

According to the data, the acids found in cannabis are effective against the alpha and beta variants of Covid-19.




					metro.co.uk


----------



## 2hats (Jan 13, 2022)

(UniGe) A preprint of a study providing early indications of vaccine modulation of infectious viral load (as oppose to RNA copies as measured by PCR), such as could influence secondary attack rates.


> We assessed nasopharyngeal swabs of COVID-19 patients for quantitative infectious viral titres (IVT) by focus-forming assay and compared to overall virus isolation success and RNA genome copies. We assessed infectious viral titres during the first 5 symptomatic days in a total of 384 patients: unvaccinated individuals infected with pre-VOC SARS-CoV-2 (n=118) or Delta (n=127) and [mRNA] vaccine breakthrough infections with Delta (n=121) or Omicron (n=18).


They observed:

Low correlation between genome copies and infectious viral titres.
No correlation between infectious viral load, age and sex of patients.
Delta/B.1.617.2 infected unvaccinated patients have higher infectious viral load.
Vaccinated patients have lower infectious viral load than unvaccinated patients.
In previously vaccinated subjects infection with omicron/B.1.1.529 results in similar infectious viral loads like delta.



> In vaccinated vs. unvaccinated Delta infected individuals, RNA genome copies were comparable but vaccinated individuals have significantly lower IVTs, and cleared virus faster. Vaccinated individuals with Omicron infection had comparable IVTs to Delta breakthrough infections.


Note that this study focussed on individuals with high viral loads (ct<27, as measured by PCR) and only in the 5 days following onset of symptoms. The study did not investigate asymptomatic cases.
DOI: 10.1101/2022.01.10.22269010.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 13, 2022)

Not SARS-CoV-2 specific but of great relevance to all vaccine development.

From LJI (Crotty's lab) an investigation (animal study) of germinal centre responses ("evolution in miniature"), the driver of B cell affinity maturation).

In an animal model they immunised with an adjuvanted (saponin-based nanoparticle*) HIV protein vax, using a 'long prime' gradually escalating dosing regimen (slow delivery over 12 days), and an eventual boost dose at 30 weeks, with a view to understanding how long germinal centres might last (designated group 3). They also used a traditional 2-dose approach (group 1, alum adjuvant) and an escalating prime with boost (group 2), both at 10 week dosing intervals.

Germinal centres were observed to persist for over 6 months, without renewed exposure to antigen, indeed up to 9 months.

Following an eventual boost ("second") dose, they observed the highest and broadest HIV neutralising antibody titres seen in this and any previous work.


> We have shown that germinal centers (GCs) can persist for greater than six months in response to a priming immunization, with a number of notable outcomes. These findings indicate that patience can have great value for allowing antibody diversification and evolution in GCs over surprisingly extended periods of time. A long prime, adjuvanted, escalating dose immunization approach holds promise for difficult vaccine targets.


DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.20.473537.
*SMNP, a new adjuvant described in detail here - DOI: 10.1126/sciimmunol.abf1152.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 19, 2022)

2hats said:


> The EMA has just recommended granting a conditional marketing authorisation for Novavax's adjuvanted protein-based recombinant vaccine, NVX-CoV2373, aka Nuvaxovid™. The EC has now granted that.
> 
> Separately, the WHO has granted NVX-CoV2373 Emergency Use Listing (EUL).


Novavax NVX-CoV2373 ('Nuvaxovid') will be offered to people in Belgium from the start of March. Priority will be given to persons allergic to the other vaccine formulations or who experienced adverse side effects after a first dose of one of them.








						Belgium will offer Novavax vaccine to those allergic to Pfizer or Moderna
					

Belgium will start offering the Novavax vaccine to people who are allergic reactions to Pfizer or Moderna or had proven side effects after a first dose.




					www.brusselstimes.com
				




Separately, NVX-CoV2373 has been approved by South Korea's Ministry of Food and Drug Safety.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 19, 2022)

Fresh phase 1/2 trial results for Valneva's whole virus, inactivated, adjuvanted vaccine VLA2001.

Preliminary data (n=30) indicate that a 3-dose series of VLA2001 (two doses a month apart followed by a third booster dose 6-7 months later) demonstrated neutralisation of delta/B.1.617.2 (100% of samples) and omicron/B.1.1.529 (87% of samples). Fold reduction relative to ancestral virus was 2.7-fold for delta and 16.7-fold for omicron. No analysis of T cell activity provided.








						Valneva says early studies show COVID-19 vaccine effective against Omicron
					

French biotech firm Valneva said on Wednesday that preliminary studies showed that three doses of its inactivated COVID-19 vaccine candidate neutralised the Omicron variant of the disease.




					www.reuters.com
				




Valneva are expecting MHRA to be in a position to be able to grant regulatory approval before the end of this quarter.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 19, 2022)

How would they achieve that ?


----------



## Brainaddict (Jan 19, 2022)

2hats said:


> Fresh phase 1/2 trial results for Valneva's whole virus, inactivated, adjuvanted vaccine VLA2001.
> 
> Preliminary data (n=30) indicate that a 3-dose series of VLA2001 (two doses a month apart followed by a third booster dose 6-7 months later) demonstrated neutralisation of delta/B.1.617.2 (100% of samples) and omicron/B.1.1.529 (87% of samples). Fold reduction relative to ancestral virus was 2.7-fold for delta and 16.7-fold for omicron. No analysis of T cell activity provided.
> 
> ...


Does their vaccine have advantages over other ones particularly? I haven't heard much about it.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 19, 2022)

gentlegreen said:


> How would they achieve that ?



One way would be to develop a vaccine which detects more core attributes of the virus that are less likely to mutate successfully. Which I think is already being done.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 19, 2022)

existentialist said:


> One way would be to develop a vaccine which detects more core attributes of the virus that are less likely to mutate successfully. Which I think is already being done.


It's just that according to TWIV no vaccine has ever achieved that.
And would it be a good thing to have an immune system poised ready to pounce ?
It might be OK as a temporary measure as with "boosters" during a pandemic, but long-term ?

I imagine something similar must be happening with all those viruses up our noses or wherever that never progress to symptomatic disease ...

When I worked in the petri dish and would always get one or sometimes two flu-lites per year, I quite often felt as if I was sickening for something that never materialised ...

My threshold for going in to work was whether I could face cycling the 4 miles and it was all or nothing - I was never likely to be a spreader - unless there was a lot of asymptomatic spread going on...(no sneezing, no runny nose)


----------



## 2hats (Jan 19, 2022)

Brainaddict said:


> Does their vaccine have advantages over other ones particularly? I haven't heard much about it.


Inactivated whole virus has the potential to provide more (all) epitopes, rather than just those in spike, and thus a wider range of epitopes that are more likely to be preserved over variant types (until preserved epitopes are all identified and then specifically engineered for in other platforms). It's also significantly less reactogenic and has been shown to be better tolerated. Separately, given it is a long established traditional vaccine platform, those reluctant to take up more recent technologies, eg mRNA, VLP, DNA or viral vector, might be more inclined to choose it.


----------



## wemakeyousoundb (Jan 19, 2022)

gentlegreen said:


> It's just that according to TWIV no vaccine has ever achieved that.
> And would it be a good thing to have an immune system poised ready to pounce ?
> It might be OK as a temporary measure as with "boosters" during a pandemic, but long-term ?
> 
> ...


you are the asymptomatic carrier and I want a hobnob


----------



## wemakeyousoundb (Jan 19, 2022)

2hats said:


> Inactivated whole virus has the potential to provide more (all) epitopes, rather than just those in spike, and thus a wider range of epitopes that are more likely to be preserved over variant types (until preserved epitopes are all identified and then specifically engineered for in other platforms). It's also significantly less reactogenic and has been shown to be better tolerated. Separately, given it is a long established traditional vaccine platform, those reluctant to take up more recent technologies, eg mRNA, VLP, DNA or viral vector, might be more inclined to choose it.


so closer to what bill gates aim for in that gentlegreen post?


----------



## 2hats (Jan 19, 2022)

wemakeyousoundb said:


> so closer to what bill gates aim for in that gentlegreen post?


Not really. That would probably need a formulation on an intranasal or oral vaccine platform.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 19, 2022)

2hats said:


> Not really. That would probably need a formulation on an intranasal or oral vaccine platform.


or ultra-slow-release ?


----------



## 2hats (Jan 20, 2022)

Novavax NVX-CoV2373 ('Nuvaxovid')  has just been granted provisional approval in Australia.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 20, 2022)

gentlegreen said:


> or ultra-slow-release ?


As per the Crotty study? Can't quite envisage a mechanism for doing that intranasally, though perhaps possible via some sort of slow-release skin patch (maybe MNP) proximal to the upper neck lymph nodes? (It's probably only practical intramuscularly or sub/trans-dermally). Can see various potential issues with that though, both in terms of delivery route (see below) and enthusiasm for uptake.


gentlegreen said:


> How would they achieve that ?



So I meant to highlight the following studies concerning intranasal vaccination and IgA a few weeks ago; they are worth noting and relevant to the question you pose.

Regarding vaccines for sterilising immunity, which will need to target the mucosal membranes in the respiratory tract, the route of administration matters (this has been seen before).

First, (Mt Sinai, NYC) an investigation of mucosal antibody response in vaccinees.


> Mucosal immune responses are critical to prevent respiratory infections.


A key characteristic of mucosal IgA antibodies is that they are mostly present in the form of multimers (eg dimers). Multimeric IgA antibodies display higher anti-viral activity than monomeric IgA antibodies (the main form of systemic IgA, such as are found in sera and are induced by intramuscular vaccination).


> [Mucosal IgA antibodies] are known to provide immediate immunity by eliminating respiratory pathogens before they pass through the mucosal barrier.



The researchers analysed sera and saliva from individuals (n=30, 7M/23F, age range 21-65) with and without COVID-19 at multiple timepoints before and after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination (a mix of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273). They observed that vaccination induced only a weak mucosal IgA response in seronaive vaccinees, whilst convalescent vaccinees exhibited a strong mucosal IgA response.

The precise mechanism for the heterogeneity observed is yet to be determined (there are hypotheses that prior infection leads to better IgA homing to the respiratory tract; the immune system does indeed have 'memory'). Intranasal vaccination strategies that can successfully induce mucosal IgA "should be sought for control of the pandemic".
DOI: 10.1101/2021.12.06.21267352.

Then, (Yale/Mt Sinai, NYC) an interesting animal study, here specific to influenza but of relevance to SARS-CoV-2 as well, that illustrates some key advantages of intranasal vaccination over intramuscular (systemic) vaccination in respect of respiratory pathogens.

In an animal model they demonstrated that intranasal (but not systemic) immunisation (here with both protein-based and RNA-based vaccines) induced local IgA secretion in the mucous membranes of the respiratory tract, promoting a wide range of cells expressing such (tissue-resident memory B cells, plasmablasts, and plasma cells), leading to the establishment of IgA-secreting cells in the lung (not seen when the same vaccine was delivered intramuscularly or intraperitoneally). Finally, local IgA secretion was observed to provide superior protection to circulating antibodies alone when experiencing a secondary challenge, whether that be the same strain of flu (that the vaccine was designed to target) or another strain.
 


> In summary, our data demonstrate that IgA-producing cells form in the lung after intranasal immunization and contribute to protection against challenge with homologous and heterologous influenza virus infection. Insights gained from our current study may be useful in designing new vaccines against other respiratory virus infections.


DOI: 10.1126/sciimmunol.abj5129.

See also earlier post #1418.

Note: it is worth mentioning that oral vaccination also has the potential to induce a significant mucosal IgA response. I count at least three oral and five intranasal COVID-19 vaccine candidates under evaluation.

TL;DR:


> Intranasal (and perhaps oral) vaccines may promote an immune response capable of significantly reducing infection and thus transmission.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 20, 2022)

woot 









						SARS-CoV-2 ferritin nanoparticle vaccine induces robust innate immune activity driving polyfunctional spike-specific T cell responses - npj Vaccines
					

The emergence of variants of concern, some with reduced susceptibility to COVID-19 vaccines underscores consideration for the understanding of vaccine design that optimizes induction of effective cellular and humoral immune responses. We assessed a SARS-CoV-2 spike-ferritin nanoparticle (SpFN)...




					www.nature.com
				



Published: 13 December 2021
SARS-CoV-2 ferritin nanoparticle vaccine induces robust innate immune activity driving polyfunctional spike-specific T cell responses​
We have recently developed a SARS-CoV-2 sub-unit vaccine based on a ferritin nanoparticle platform18 that displays a pre-fusion stabilized spike on its surface22,23. The spike protein was modified to generate a stable spike trimer formation on the ferritin molecule23,24. The stabilized prefusion-spike protein of the Wuhan-Hu-1 strain of SARS-CoV-2 was genetically linked to form a ferritin-fusion recombinant protein, which naturally forms a Spike Ferritin nanoparticle (SpFN). Ferritin is a naturally occurring, ubiquitous, iron-carrying protein that self-oligomerizes into a 24-unit spherical particle and is currently being evaluated as a vaccine platform for influenza in two phase 1 clinical trials (NCT03186781, NCT03814720) with two further trials in the recruitment phase for Epstein-Barr virus (NCT04645147) and Influenza H10 (NCT04579250).


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 20, 2022)

2hats said:


> Novavax NVX-CoV2373 ('Nuvaxovid')  has just been granted provisional approval in Australia.



Can't believe those plucky wild colonial boys haven't taken the opportunity to name this the Novak vaccine  .


----------



## 2hats (Jan 21, 2022)

(Spallanzani/Gamaleya) A small study, funded by the Russian Direct Investment Fund, investigating neutralisation (only, no T cell analysis) of Sputnik V versus omicron/BA.1 after the standard two-dose primary series (21 day dosing interval, no third-dose booster).

They measured a decrease in neutralising antibody (live virus assay) to the omicron variant at 8.1-fold for Sputnik V and 21.4-fold for a group of BNT162b2 vaccinees. Analysis showed that 74.2% of Sputnik V and 56.9% of BNT162b2-vaccinated sera had detectable neutralising antibodies to omicron.





Gamaleya claim that Sputnik V demonstrates 2.6 times levels of neutralising antibodies to omicron compared to BNT162b2 at 3 months after the second dose of each (an even greater factor is suggested at 6 months post second dose though Sputnik V sera are confusingly declared as being sampled variously at "months 3-6", which would fundamentally undermine any comparison at that time point). It is however not clear from the preprint whether the assays are directly comparable (eg performed in the same lab under identical conditions with identical stock materials sourced from the same batch). Interpreting neutralisation assay performance between different vaccines is difficult as standardisation can be tricky.

Gamaleya suggest that the apparent superior performance of Sputnik V is down to (i) the use of non-stabilised spike leading to a wider range of antibodies targeting epitopes outside of the heavily mutated RBD, (ii) heterologous regimen and (iii) adenoviral vector delivery better mimicking natural infection (extended half-life of antigen). These points have been suggested as perhaps offering potential advantages in previous studies from other research groups.

Note that the study declares several limitations: small sample numbers, lack of age and comorbidity dependent neutralising antibody response, limited accuracy on samples under the limit of detection and heterogeneity in convalescent vaccinee arm.
DOI: 10.1101/2022.01.15.22269335.









						Sputnik V shows higher Omicron-antibody levels than Pfizer in preliminary study
					

A small preliminary laboratory study has shown that levels of Omicron-neutralising antibodies of people vaccinated with Russia's Sputnik V vaccine did not decline as much as of those who had Pfizer shots.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## elbows (Jan 21, 2022)

I see the UKHSA are now publishing technical briefings on therapeutic agents, including number of patients treated with various different antivirals, and some info on post-treatment genetic sequencing, checking for particular mutations.





__





						COVID-19 therapeutic agents: technical briefings
					

Technical briefing documents on coronavirus (COVID-19) therapeutic agents.




					www.gov.uk


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 22, 2022)

2hats said:


> Gamaleya suggest that the apparent superior performance of Sputnik V is down to (i) the use of non-stabilised spike leading to a wider range of antibodies targeting epitopes outside of the heavily mutated RBD, (ii) heterologous regimen and (iii) adenoviral vector delivery better mimicking natural infection (extended half-life of antigen). These points have been suggested as perhaps offering potential advantages in previous studies from other research groups.


Pre-fusion issue presumably true of Astra Zeneca too ?
Did they lose out on the heterologous thing ?


----------



## elbows (Jan 28, 2022)

Paxlovid UK rollout to begin February 10th:









						Second ground-breaking antiviral to be deployed to country's most vulnerable
					

Thousands of those most at-risk to COVID-19 will soon be able to access the UK’s second ground-breaking antiviral




					www.gov.uk


----------



## 2hats (Feb 2, 2022)

Notably the first time the FDA has asked a vaccine manufacturer to apply for approval rather than the other way around.








						U.S. considers authorization of first COVID vaccine for children under 5
					

U.S. regulators are considering the first COVID-19 vaccine for children under the age of 5, the only age group not yet eligible for the shots, after Pfizer Inc and BioNTech SE began the regulatory approval process on Tuesday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Feb 2, 2022)

China's Walvax Biotechnology mRNA vaccine, ARCoV, embarks on a 28k participant trial. ARCoV expresses SARS-CoV-2 RBD only and not the full spike (as seen in all currently approved mRNA vaccines). China has yet to approve a locally produced mRNA vaccine and has not yet imported any other mRNA vaccine.








						China's Walvax says has most participants for large mRNA COVID vaccine trial
					

China's Walvax Biotechnology has recruited most of the 28,000 participants needed for a large clinical trial of its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine candidate, a senior company official said on Thursday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Feb 3, 2022)

Novavax NVX-CoV2373 ('Nuvaxovid') approved in the UK.








						Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency Grants Conditional Marketing Authorization for Novavax COVID-19 Vaccine in Great Britain*
					

Nuvaxovid™ COVID-19 Vaccine (recombinant, adjuvanted)▼ is the first protein-based COVID-19 vaccine authorized in Great Britain Novavax and the U.K. Vaccines Taskforce previously announced an...




					ir.novavax.com
				











						Novavax Covid jab approved by UK drugs regulator
					

UK regulator the MHRA says Nuvaxovid is safe as a first and second dose in adults.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 3, 2022)

Presumably also as boosters now that most people have had first and second doses ?


----------



## 2hats (Feb 5, 2022)

(NIH/Moderna/others) Results from an animal model study into the immunogenicity of an omicron-specific booster version of the Moderna mRNA vaccine.

These suggest that at best there is possibly little advantage in an omicron-specific booster and it might even be somewhat inferior to a booster dose of original, WT based, vaccine (mRNA-1273).


> An Omicron boost may not provide greater immunity or protection compared to a boost with the current mRNA-1273 vaccine.


DOI: 10.1101/2022.02.03.479037.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 5, 2022)

Afrigen synthesise mRNA-1273 from public data. The vaccine candidate would be the first to be made based on a widely used vaccine without the assistance and approval of the developer. It is also the first mRNA vaccine designed, developed and produced at lab scale on the African continent.








						In world first, South Africa's Afrigen makes mRNA COVID vaccine using Moderna data
					

South Africa's Afrigen Biologics has used the publicly available sequence of Moderna Inc's mRNA COVID-19 vaccine to make its own version of the shot, which could be tested in humans before the end of this year, Afrigen's top executive said on Thursday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## two sheds (Feb 10, 2022)

Researchers confirm newly developed inhaled vaccine delivers broad protection against SARS-CoV-2, variants of concern
					

Because inhaled vaccines target the lungs and upper airways where respiratory viruses first enter the body, they are far more effective at inducing a protective immune response, the researchers report.




					brighterworld.mcmaster.ca
				




looks interesting


----------



## 2hats (Feb 11, 2022)

Results of the Novavax NVX-CoV2373 ('Nuvaxovid') phase 3 clinical trial (PREVENT-19) extension in 12-17 years olds (2,247 individuals in the US, primary two-dose series).

Efficacy (defined as PCR confirmed infection at least 7 days after the second dose) to delta (during the period of the trial when it was identified in 100% of all positive cases) was found to be 82.0% (95%CI: 32.4-95.2). Overall efficacy to all COVID-19 was observed to be 79.5% (95%CI: 46.8-92.1).

Immunologically, IgG responses against spike proteins of several variants (including alpha, beta, delta, gamma, mu and omicron) were 2-3 times higher than those observed in adults, with 100% seroconversion. All endpoints were met with non-inferior immunoresponses compared to young adults (18-26 years old) from earlier study work.

Safety and reactogenicity were found to be good with no significant levels of serious and severe adverse reactions compared to placebo arms; local and systemic reactogenicity was generally lower than or similar to adults.








						Novavax says COVID-19 shot 80% effective in adolescent study
					

Novavax Inc said on Thursday its two-dose vaccine was 80% effective against COVID-19 in a late-stage trial testing the shot in teens aged 12 to 17 years.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Feb 12, 2022)

2hats said:


> (NIH/Moderna/others) Results from an animal model study into the immunogenicity of an omicron-specific booster version of the Moderna mRNA vaccine.
> 
> These suggest that at best there is possibly little advantage in an omicron-specific booster and it might even be somewhat inferior to a booster dose of original, WT based, vaccine (mRNA-1273).
> 
> DOI: 10.1101/2022.02.03.479037.


(Moderna) An additional animal model study which reaches a similar conclusion - namely no strong case for rolling out a redesigned booster:


> In mice, boosting with mRNA-1273 (original) or mRNA-1273.529 (omicron-specific) enhances protection against B.1.1.529 infection with limited differences in efficacy measured.


DOI: 10.1101/2022.02.07.479419.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 12, 2022)

2hats said:


> Notably the first time the FDA has asked a vaccine manufacturer to apply for approval rather than the other way around.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Pfizer have asked the FDA to wait on further data (due around April).





__





						Pfizer and BioNTech Provide Update on Rolling Submission for Emergency Use Authorization of Their COVID-19 Vaccine in Children 6 Months Through 4 Years of Age | Pfizer
					

Pfizer Inc. (NYSE: PFE) and BioNTech SE (Nasdaq: BNTX) today announced plans to extend their rolling submission to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) seeking to amend the Emergency Use Authorization of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine to include children 6 months through 4 years of...




					www.pfizer.com


----------



## 2hats (Feb 23, 2022)

Sanofi/GSK report that they are to seek regulatory approval (from the US FDA, EMA and others) for their 10µg two-dose AS03 (squalene) adjuvanted recombinant protein subunit COVID-19 vaccine, VAT08, which expresses spike (stable at standard refrigeration temperatures).

In their phase 3 primary series trial (>10k participants of 18+ years of age), two doses of the Sanofi-GSK vaccine in seronegative populations demonstrated:

100% efficacy against severe COVID-19 disease and hospitalisations (zero cases in the study).
75% efficacy against moderate or severe COVID-19 disease.
57.9% (95%CI:26.5-76.7) efficacy against any symptomatic COVID-19 disease.
77% efficacy against any delta variant associated symptomatic COVID-19 disease (analysis still underway).
high rates of seroconversion (>95%).
Additionally they demonstrated that when used as a third dose booster following a mRNA or viral vector two-dose primary series neutralising antibodies were raised 18 to 30 fold. The vaccine candidate had a favourable safety profile whether used as a primary series or a booster.
 









						Sanofi, GSK to seek approval for COVID vaccine candidate
					

French drugmaker Sanofi and its British partner GlaxoSmithKline are seeking regulatory approval for their COVID-19 vaccine to be used as a booster, as well as a standalone two-dose shot, after several setbacks.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Feb 23, 2022)

In other vaccine related news...

Novavax have begun shipping their Nuvaxovid recombinant, adjuvanted protein subunit vaccine, NVX-CoV2373, to a number of EU member states where it has be authorised for use in persons 18+ years of age.

Valneva have been awarded £20 million of funding by Scottish Enterprise for further research and development of their inactivated, whole virus COVID-19 vaccine candidate, VLA2001, and other Valneva vaccines. Discussions between Valneva and the Scottish government have included the potential supply of VLA2001 to Scotland in the future, subject to regulatory approval.


----------



## 2hats (Mar 9, 2022)

Extended UK trials data for Novavax NVX-CoV2373 indicates that efficacy to any infection, even asymptomatic (as measured by PCR positive test or anti-nucleocapsid antibodies), was sustained at 82.5% (95%CI:75.0-87.7) for 6 months against all variants (for the trial data collection period Nov202-May2021). This compares to 89.7% (95%CI:80.2-94.6) over the original first three months of the trial, and is significantly less than any other approved vaccine. Efficacy against severe disease was 100%.








						Novavax Announces Extended Durability of Protection Against Infection and Disease in United Kingdom COVID-19 Vaccine Phase 3 Clinical Trial
					

Novavax, Inc. (Nasdaq: NVAX), a biotechnology company dedicated to developing and commercializing next-generation vaccines for serious infectious diseases, today shared extended analysis from its...




					ir.novavax.com


----------



## elbows (Mar 25, 2022)

I see the picture of waning immunity has evolved a bit in the latest vaccine surveillance report. I dont really have time to get into detail now but their attempts to look at effectiveness in regards hospitalisation seems to have improved in quality because they are trying to make a distinction between several different definitions of hospital treatment.

There is also a handy graph showing how many hospitalisations over time they think there would have been during the Omicron waves if there had been no boosters.



			https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1063023/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-12.pdf


----------



## elbows (Mar 25, 2022)

Since there was rather a lot of jargon in the labelling of that table on vaccine effectiveness, here is a screenshot from this weeks Indie sage video which hopefully makes it a bit clearer what the columns are attempting to show.


----------



## 2hats (Apr 1, 2022)

Moderna interim KidCOVE immunobridging study results: two 25μg doses (4 week interval) of mRNA-1273 in (6.7k) participants 6 months to under 6 years provoked similar immunogenic response to 2x100μg dose primary series in 18-25yo adults (neutralising GMR 1.3x and 1x in 6m-2y, 2-6y v. 18-25y). Well tolerated with low reactogenicity. No severe, or worse, cases of COVID-19 were observed in the participants (omicron dominant variant). Moderna will submit a request for authorisation for this series in these age groups with the FDA, EMA, etc.




__





						Moderna Announces its COVID-19 Vaccine Phase 2/3 Study in Children 6 Months to Under 6 Years Has Successfully Met Its Primary Endpoint
					

Two 25 μg doses of mRNA-1273 in participants 6 months to under 6 years met primary endpoint with robust neutralizing antibody titers similar to adults mRNA-1273 was generally well tolerated in this age group Although not a primary endpoint, statistically significant vaccine efficacy was observed...




					investors.modernatx.com


----------



## 2hats (Apr 6, 2022)

(MIT/Harvard/LJI/others): Potentially interesting findings regarding subtle (perhaps not quite so subtle) differences in vaccine mRNA performance. This study (73 vaccinees, who received the standard primary series) hints to there possibly being differences in class switching: "these findings suggest that subtle variation in immune responses induced by the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines may confer differential protection".


> Although no difference in neutralizing activity has been reported across the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines, differences were observed across the two platforms in this study, both in terms of isotype or subclass and in terms of Fc functions [...] elevated concentrations of IgA were noted following mRNA-1273, accompanied by higher antibody dependent neutrophil phagocytosis and antibody dependent natural killer activity.


Differences in lipid nanoparticle packaging may be a factor (though of course dosage and dose interval timing may also play roles here). mRNA-1273 appears to promote greater Fc-functional antibody response, which may not be as compromised as neutralising antibodies are when a dominant VOC is usurped by a new VOC (since Fc can target the whole surface of the spike antigen). It also appears to promote higher IgA, which as previously highlighted (#1660), potentially contributes to shutting down infection, as well as increased natural killer T-cell and phagocyte levels, which are also both key components of the innate response.

Though this work suggests maybe only a small advantage for mRNA-1273 over BNT162b2, this is perhaps indicative that there is still scope for further tuning of mRNA vaccines.
DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.abm2311.

(Minor footnote: Elon Musk is listed as a co-author. Apparently because "SpaceX provided in-kind contributions in support of the research such as logistical coordination and access to facilities". He's also listed as Nth co-author on several referenced papers too).


----------



## 2hats (Apr 13, 2022)

(Emory) On the importance of looking beyond the spike for better protection to both past and future variants: an intramuscular modified vaccinia Ankara (MVA) virus* recombinant viral vector vaccine, MVA/SdFCS-N, expressing SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid as well as spike/RBD, elicited cross-reactive antibody and CD4/CD8 T cell responses, in both systemic and mucosal compartments, protecting against heterologous SARS-CoV-2 VOC more effectively than the original solely prefusion-stabilised, spike-expressing version of the vaccine, MVA/S, in animal models.



> While spike continues to accumulate mutations, the nucleocapsid (N) protein remains significantly more conserved among betacoronaviruses. It is a major structural protein and induces potent T cell responses during natural infection. For these reasons, it is an attractive target for induction of broadly-active T cells. Additionally, T cells can also provide localized protection in the respiratory mucosa so enhancing mucosal immunity could also prevent new infections by destroying incoming virions before they can replicate, reduce disease severity via local antiviral effects in the lower respiratory tract, and stop transmission by damaging virions prior to exhalation.
> 
> These results showed that improved MVA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccine delivered intramuscularly elicits strong spike-specific antibody response with diverse functions and T-cell responses to spike and N, which contribute to protective immunity against homologous and heterologous SARS-CoV-2 variants. They also highlight the potential of MVA/dFCS-N vaccine as the initial or booster vaccine against future emerging variants.


* an attenuated vaccine of a poxvirus.
DOI:10.1126/sciimmunol.abo0226.


----------



## 2hats (Apr 13, 2022)

(UniGe) A study of both unvaccinated and vaccinated individuals measuring infectious viral loads (by in vitro culturability assay) during the first five days of symptomatic infection (early-type, delta and omicron).

Finally, we have a clear indication that number of infectious particles produced in infected persons is significantly lower in vaccinees (*vaccines not only reduce risk of severe disease but also risk of transmission*). Also that genome copies (PCR Ct values) are not correlated with those numbers of infectious particles.





In more detail:


> Unvaccinated individuals infected with pre-VOC SARS-CoV-2 had lower infectious VL compared to Delta-infected unvaccinated individuals. Full vaccination (defined as >2weeks after reception of 2nd dose during primary vaccination series) significantly reduced infectious VL for Delta breakthrough cases compared to unvaccinated individuals. For Omicron breakthrough cases, reduced infectious VL was only observed in boosted but not in fully vaccinated individuals compared to unvaccinated subjects. In addition, infectious VL was lower in fully vaccinated Omicron- compared to fully vaccinated Delta-infected individuals, suggesting that other mechanisms than increased infectious VL contribute to the high infectiousness of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron. Our findings indicate that vaccines may lower transmission risk and therefore have a public health benefit beyond the individual protection from severe disease.


DOI:10.1038/s41591-022-01816-0.


----------



## 2hats (Apr 13, 2022)

(UPenn) A longitudinal antibody study in mRNA vaccinees (N~60; a mix of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 recipients) for 10 months after the primary 2-dose series and then for 3 months after a third dose booster.

Neutralising antibody titres stabilised around 6 months after primary vaccination. Memory B cells were stable for over 9 months post-vaccination and over half of them cross-reacted to omicron. It was also observed that omicron-reactive memory B cells were reactivated by a 3rd dose of current generation vaccine. Low pre-boost antibody levels correlated with a greater fold increase after boosting (which likely suggests _topping-off_ in those with high levels of circulating antibodies, implying limited additional advantage of repeated short-interval boosting). Antibody quality (through affinity maturation) continued to improve for at least 9 months after 2-dose vaccination (as noted previously by Crotty et al in animal models).

Antibody titres post-3rd dose were similar to those observed in SARS-CoV-2 recovered individuals after 2 doses of mRNA vaccine (hybrid immunity). Breakthrough infection after 2 doses of mRNA vaccine also appeared to produce similar increases in antibodies to a 3rd vaccine dose. These boosted antibody responses subsequently declined over time but still remained significantly above pre-boost levels at 3 months post-3rd dose.
DOI:10.1016/j.cell.2022.04.009.


----------



## 2hats (Apr 14, 2022)

Valneva's whole virus, inactivated, adjuvanted vaccine, VLA2001, receives MHRA regulatory approval in the UK (as a two-dose primary series of 0.5 mL each (25 Antigen Units) given at least 28 days apart in 18-50 year olds).








						Valneva COVID-19 vaccine approved by MHRA
					

An approval has been granted after the Valneva COVID-19 vaccine was found to meet the required safety, quality and effectiveness standards.




					www.gov.uk
				











						Valneva Covid vaccine approved for use in UK
					

The Valneva jab is manufactured using technology similar to how flu shots are made.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## 2hats (Apr 14, 2022)

Just to note that, during a press briefing yesterday, the Pfizer CEO indicated their intent to develop a multivalent vaccine targeting both omicron and previous VOCs by this autumn.








						Pfizer's Bourla: COVID vaccines for new variants possible for Fall
					

Pfizer Chief Executive Albert Bourla said on Wednesday that the company could possibly develop a new vaccine that protects against the Omicron variant as well as older forms of COVID-19 by autumn.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## teuchter (Apr 14, 2022)

2hats said:


> (UniGe) A study of both unvaccinated and vaccinated individuals measuring infectious viral loads (by in vitro culturability assay) during the first five days of symptomatic infection (early-type, delta and omicron).
> 
> Finally, we have a clear indication that number of infectious particles produced in infected persons is significantly lower in vaccinees (*vaccines not only reduce risk of severe disease but also risk of transmission*). Also that genome copies (PCR Ct values) are not correlated with those numbers of infectious particles.
> 
> ...


Am I interpreting that graph correctly if I conclude that vaccination reduces transmission significantly but not dramatically? Or does that log scale on the Y axis mean that the difference is actually quite dramatic?


----------



## elbows (Apr 14, 2022)

teuchter said:


> Am I interpreting that graph correctly if I conclude that vaccination reduces transmission significantly but not dramatically? Or does that log scale on the Y axis mean that the difference is actually quite dramatic?


You've probably answered your own question but here are a couple of quotes from the full paper that might help. My bold:

Delta:



> The decrease in infectious VL was even more pronounced in vaccinated patients (*4.78 fold*, 0.68 log10, p<0.0001)



Omicron:



> Omicron breakthrough infections in fully vaccinated patients resulted in similar genome copies compared to Delta, but significantly lower infectious VLs (*14 fold*, 1.146 log10, p<0.0001)





> a significantly lower infectious VL, but not RNA VL, was observed for boosted individuals (*5.3 fold*, 0.7280 log10, p=0.0004)



I probably didnt quote enough of those sections to fully understand what each one relates to, but hopefully the 'how many fold reduction' info is enough to get the broad idea.

There are plenty of caveats and tedious details in the study, so some caution is still required when tempted to directly equate viral loads with transmission. Other factors also influence transmission, and they saw evidence that Omicrons transmission advantage is not coming from higer viral loads. All the same, they still reached conclusions they considered to be relevant to public health.


----------



## teuchter (Apr 14, 2022)

It's something that would be good to understand more fully. Certainly it could change my opinion on things like whether vaccination should be mandatory for healthcare workers, and so on.


----------



## elbows (Apr 14, 2022)

Indeed. My attitude is still that health workers have a profession duty to get such vaccines. But that the limitations to what vaccines can achieve in terms of infection prevention, combined with the effects on staffing levels that forcing through a strict rule about this within the rapid timeframe first envisaged was going to cause, made the original policy counterproductive. So it made sense to back off, but I still want there to be ongoing campaigns to improve uptake in that sector, and I hope a time comes when even more effective vaccines are available which make the case simpler. In the meantime, studies like the above are important.


----------



## 2hats (Apr 14, 2022)

(Technion & others) A detailed mathematical model, calibrated to Israeli data, to understand the impact of their vaccination and booster campaign (all BNT162b2) from the individual to the population level. This throws further (epidemiological) light on the post-vaccination transmission question.


> In this work, we present an in-depth analysis of the population-level impact of the different elements of the booster campaign on epidemic outcomes. We developed a transmission model that incorporates the waning of vaccine-induced immunity and its buildup after boosting. The model accounts for vaccine and booster administration per age group at a daily resolution and is calibrated using real-world data from Israel in the period from July 1st to November 25th 2021. The model was fitted to time series of polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed cases in 10-year age groups and different vaccination states. We used the calibrated model to study the impact of the booster campaign by quantifying the outcomes of counter-factual scenarios such as the application of alternative boosting campaigns in which boosting is restricted to specific age groups or in which the timing of the booster campaign is modified.





> The results point to the vast benefits of vaccinating younger age groups that are not at a high risk of developing severe disease but play an important role in transmission.


This study also indicates that the timing of booster campaigns is critical during exponential phases of infection growth.
DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.abn9836.


----------



## 2hats (Apr 14, 2022)

(AHRI/UKwaZulu-Natal) In a small South African study (N=18) of beta/B.1.351 convalescent vaccinees a *~69x increase* in omicron neutralisation was observed (live virus neutralisation assay). This compared to results from an earlier study*, by the same group, where they saw a (typically) *~20x drop* in vaccinees' omicron neutralisation where prior infection was due to delta.

Obviously hybrid immunity with adequate affinity maturation will be playing some role in the overall magnitude of immunogenic responses (vaccination was 6-8 months after the original infection).

However, this _may_ go some way to explaining why South Africa does not appear to have suffered so badly from the recent omicron wave. This _could_ also perhaps flag up that SA hospitalisation/death figures _might_ not be such a good guide in other regions for BA.4/BA.5 pathogenesis.

Finally, this work underlines how antigenic exposure history leads to heterogeneity in outcomes, and it _might_ indicate that a second-generation vaccine expressing beta-spike _may_ have utility in tackling omicron lineages.
DOI: pending; draft preprint.
* DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-04387-1.


----------



## 2hats (Apr 17, 2022)

2hats said:


> (AHRI/UKwaZulu-Natal) In a small South African study (N=18) of beta/B.1.351 convalescent vaccinees a *~69x increase* in omicron neutralisation was observed (live virus neutralisation assay). This compared to results from an earlier study*, by the same group, where they saw a (typically) *~20x drop* in vaccinees' omicron neutralisation where prior infection was due to delta.
> [...]
> *DOI: pending*


Preprint - DOI:10.1101/2022.04.15.22273711.


----------



## 2hats (Apr 17, 2022)

(Rockefeller) A small (n=18) six month study of non-convalescent recipients (23-56 years) of single-dose J&J/Janssen Ad.26.COV.2.


> The single dose Ad.26.COV.2 (Janssen) vaccine elicits lower levels of neutralizing antibodies and shows more limited efficacy in protection against infection than either of the available mRNA vaccines. [...] The data help explain why boosting Ad.26.COV.2 vaccine recipients with mRNA vaccines is effective, and why the Janssen vaccine appears to have been less protective against severe disease during the Omicron surge than the mRNA vaccine.


DOI:10.1101/2022.03.31.486548


----------



## 2hats (Apr 17, 2022)

(LJI) From Crotty&Sette a small (n=27) study of recipients of a primary two-dose series of Novavax, NVX-CoV2373, which suggests potentially promising longitudinal CD4/CD8 T cell immunoresponses (ie sustained protection to serious disease due to past/present/future VOC). NVX-CoV2373 induced SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, and good antibody responses irrespective of pre-existing cross-reactivity to other endemic coronaviridae.


> Together, these data support the idea that the NVX-CoV2373 vaccine induces a complex immune response consisting of robust and polyfunctional CD4+ T cells producing Th1-type cytokines as well as a rapid cTFH cell response capable of supporting a substantial neutralizing antibody response, as well as a modest CD8+ T cell response in a subset of donors. Overall, these data show that NVX-CoV2373 induces a relatively broad humoral and cellular immune response against SARS-CoV-2 in humans, and might demonstrate distinctive long-term behavior relative to mRNA vaccines.


DOI:10.1101/2022.04.08.487674.

Separately in the UK, the chair of the JCVI COVID-19 vaccination group has indicated that they will consider NVX-CoV2373 for recommendation in "due course". Probably this would mean an approval no earlier than June.








						Whatever happened to the Novavax Covid vaccine?
					

The jab, seen as an alternative for people who are vaccine-hesitant, is widely available in the EU but still not cleared for use in the UK.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## 2hats (Apr 19, 2022)

2hats said:


> (AHRI/UKwaZulu-Natal) In a small South African study (N=18) of beta/B.1.351 convalescent vaccinees a *~69x increase* in omicron neutralisation was observed (live virus neutralisation assay).
> [...]
> Finally, this work underlines how antigenic exposure history leads to heterogeneity in outcomes, and it _might_ indicate that a second-generation vaccine expressing beta-spike _may_ have utility in tackling omicron lineages.
> DOI: 10.1101/2022.04.15.22273711.


Interesting new results from Moderna which would appear to corroborate the above work by Sigal (AHRI) on beta/omicron antigenic history.

New clinical data for Moderna's first bivalent booster candidate, 50µg of mRNA-1273.211 (Wuhan early type plus 9 beta spike mutations), demonstrated superior neutralising titres (compared to original mRNA-1273) against all tested VOC (beta, delta and omicron). That superiority was maintained for at least six months after boosting for both the beta and omicron variants. Safety and tolerability were similar to already approved mRNA-1273.

A second bivalent booster candidate, featuring WT+omicron, mRNA-1273.214 (Wuhan early type plus 32 omicron spike mutations), is currently being evaluated in a phase 2/3 study* and may prove to be their preferred Northern Hemisphere autumn 2022 booster candidate.




__





						Moderna Announces Clinical Update on Bivalent COVID-19 Booster Platform
					

Moderna's first bivalent booster vaccine candidate, mRNA-1273.211, demonstrated superior neutralizing titers compared to mRNA-1273 against all variants of concern, including Omicron; superiority was maintained for six months after booster for the Beta and Omicron variants Tolerability and safety...




					investors.modernatx.com
				











						Moderna says dual variant booster with Beta more effective vs Omicron than current shot
					

Moderna Inc on Tuesday said a COVID-19 booster designed to target the Beta variant as well as the original coronavirus generated a better immune response against a number of virus variants including Omicron.




					www.reuters.com
				




e2a: That clinical trial (*) investigating bivalent mRNA-1273.214 and mRNA-1273.529 (original omicron spike only) boosters, compared to mRNA-1273, is now underway at KCH (still recruiting participants).




__





						Pioneering multi-variant COVID booster trial opens at King's - King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
					






					www.kch.nhs.uk


----------



## two sheds (Apr 26, 2022)

Ooh ooh ooh I'm on this one already 









						Asthma drug can block crucial SARS-CoV-2 protein
					

Montelukast, an FDA-approved drug, can bind strongly to and block the activity of a SARS-CoV-2 protein called Nsp1



					www.eurekalert.org
				




With thanks to whoever on here recommended it - it is good for clearing airways.


----------



## souljacker (Apr 28, 2022)

I'm a bit confused about the vaccines they are giving to kids. The NHS site says that 5-15 year olds will get the Pfizer. There is a link on their page that takes you to the information leaflet which clearly states that the Pfizer is not suitable for under 12s.

My 11yo had the Pfizer but the governments own documentation says she shouldn't. Can anyone explain? elbows 2hats


----------



## Fruitloop (Apr 28, 2022)

two sheds said:


> Ooh ooh ooh I'm on this one already
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So is my son, and we had been wondering why Covid just seems not to be able to infect him. Most interesting.


----------



## Fruitloop (Apr 28, 2022)

souljacker said:


> I'm a bit confused about the vaccines they are giving to kids. The NHS site says that 5-15 year olds will get the Pfizer. There is a link on their page that takes you to the information leaflet which clearly states that the Pfizer is not suitable for under 12s.
> 
> My 11yo had the Pfizer but the governments own documentation says she shouldn't. Can anyone explain? elbows 2hats


Our 5 and 10 year old had the pediatric Pfizer, which is 1/3rd of the dose of the adult one. I think that's what they're supposed to get.


----------



## souljacker (Apr 28, 2022)

Fruitloop said:


> Our 5 and 10 year old had the pediatric Pfizer, which is 1/3rd of the dose of the adult one. I think that's what they're supposed to get.


I see. Still a bit odd that they state it's not suitable. It should say that the full dose isn't suitable surely.


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 28, 2022)

5-11s Patient Information Leaflet: https://www.medicines.org.uk/emc/files/pil.13134.pdf
12+ Patient Information Leaflet: https://www.medicines.org.uk/emc/files/pil.12740.pdf

The link to the PIL on this NHS page under the title "Which COVID-19 vaccine will children get?" points to a HTML version of the 12+ leaflet on GOV.UK, whereas it should probably point to a copy of the 5-11 leaflet.


----------



## elbows (Apr 28, 2022)

And the reason they havent updated the particular document which says its only for over 12s, and makes no mention at all of the dose size in that context, unlike both of the above leaflets, is that the document in question was for the initial emergency authorisation version, covered by regulation 174. They really shouldnt be linking to that one at all these days, since the vaccines are now authorised via a different mechanism, and the original patient info leaflet is therefore obsolete.

To quote from the MHRA website:



> Initially, the COVID-19 Vaccine Pfizer/BioNTech was supplied in the UK on a temporary basis under Regulation 174 of the Human Medicine Regulations 2012, but this was always intended to be a temporary arrangement. Supply of the vaccine is now in accordance with the conditional Marketing Authorisation (CMA) with all remaining Regulation 174 stocks expiring at the end of February 2022.



From Regulatory approval of Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine for COVID-19

By the way, Spikevax (Moderna) is also licensed for children here too these days, and there is a single leaflet to cover the full range of ages for that one:



			https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1069393/Spikevax_PIL_140422.pdf
		


And here is the mid April story about Moderna being approved for kids:





__





						MHRA approves the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine ‘Spikevax’ for use in 6 to 11-year olds
					

Use of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine or ‘Spikevax’ has been approved for 6 to 11s after meeting the required safety, quality and effectiveness standards




					www.gov.uk


----------



## elbows (Apr 28, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> The link to the PIL on this NHS page under the title "Which COVID-19 vaccine will children get?" points to a HTML version of the 12+ leaflet on GOV.UK, whereas it should probably point to a copy of the 5-11 leaflet.


Do you know who we could contact to get this fixed? Because as I've just said in my previous post, its actually a worse situation than them linking to the current 12+ version, they are actually linking to the old regulation 174 one which doesnt have the language about dose sizes & age.

Screenshot of where the inappropriate link is just to be clear:



From Coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine for children aged 5 to 15

With the link currently going to Information for UK recipients on Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine (Regulation 174)

Im not surprised they got confused given that the 174 leaflet says it was updated on April 27th, but whatever that update was it didnt help with this detail about children, and they should probably put something at the top of that 174 leaflet pointing out that its obsolete.


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 28, 2022)

elbows said:


> Do you know who we could contact to get this fixed?



Presumably here


----------



## elbows (Apr 28, 2022)

Thanks, I sent them a message.


----------



## StoneRoad (Apr 28, 2022)

Just been entered into the phase 2/3 clinical trials for Moderna's vaccine "omicron" variant.


----------



## elbows (May 8, 2022)

They fixed the issue with that NHS webpage we were talking about. They removed the obsolete link from that section and changed some wording, and there are plenty of links to the appropriate documents later in the article.

The section in question now reads:

*Which COVID-19 vaccine will children get?*​Children will be given the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine for both doses.

Children aged 5 to 11 will be given smaller doses than older children and adults.


----------



## 2hats (May 18, 2022)

Phase 3 immunobridging trial (>4000 18+ yr old participants) of SK Bioscience's second generation, AS03-adjuvanted, self-assembling protein nanoparticle COVID-19 vaccine candidate, GB510/AS03 ('SKYCovione') reports promising results. A refrigerator stable vaccine, administered as two 25µg doses, 4 weeks apart, it was found to be immunogenically non-inferior to AZD1222 (with 2.93 times the neutralising antibody response). Low reactogenicity noted.

SK Bioscience are aiming for regulatory approval in ROK soon, licensing it royalty-free throughout the pandemic, and intend to make it available to COVAX.





						UW Medicine-developed COVID vaccine effective in test
					

A COVID-19 vaccine developed at the University of Washington School of Medicine has proven safe and effective in late-stage clinical testing. SK bioscience, the company leading the vaccine’s clinical development, will seek authorization for its use in South Korea within the month. The Seattle...




					newsroom.uw.edu


----------



## 2hats (May 18, 2022)

The EC notifies Valneva of their intention to terminate their order for VLA2001 (up to 60 million doses) though a final decision has not yet been made (the contract has a right to cancellation if EMA approval wasn't granted by the end of April). Individual member states might still purchase.





						Valneva Receives Notice of European Commission’s Intent to Terminate COVID-19 Vaccine Purchase Agreement – Webcast Link – Valneva
					






					valneva.com


----------



## 2hats (May 18, 2022)

(Berlin) sCPD9, a live attenuated intranasal COVID-19 vaccine booster (created by codon pair de-optimisation, CPD, aka _synthetic attenuation virus engineering_, which here reduced virulence, replication rate, some 100-fold lower than the parent typ_e_). This delivered very encouraging results in a hamster model challenge trial, performing better than intramuscular mRNA or viral vector vaccines, particularly against recent VOC including delta and omicron. Notably, importantly, much higher nasal mucosa IgA were observed.
 


> We find that specifically this live attenuated vaccine elicits superior protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection especially at mucosal sites of virus entry.
> 
> An important and frequently discussed issue with live attenuated vaccines is their potential susceptibility to previously established immunity, which would restrict vaccine virus replication and potentially limit their use as booster vaccines after initial immunization by vaccination or natural infection. Our results indicate however, that sCPD9 does effectively boost immune responses and greatly improves protection.


DOI: 10.1101/2022.05.16.492138.

Human phase 2/3 trials of a CPD live attenuated intranasal vaccine, Codagenix's CoviLiv (was COVI-VAC, earlier results mentioned in posts #1433 and #1501), are already underway in the UK and have produced some encouraging interim results - blocking nasal replication and producing a robust cellular immunity response capable of responding to omicron VOC (inducing such an immunoresponse even prior to the recent omicron waves), perhaps with the potential to provide protection for a wide range of past and future variants.








						Intranasal COVID Vaccine Offers Hope Against Subvariants | BioSpace
					

Codagenix is entering the vaccine arena with a possible new frontrunner in protection: CoviLiv. It's an intranasal COVID vaccine that provides hope against subvariants.




					www.biospace.com


----------



## Indeliblelink (May 19, 2022)

Interesting. A study of 30,000 health workers in Qatar showed that the flu vaccination also gave protection against COVID19. Was in late 2020 though and protection might not be that long lasting.








						Flu vaccine could cut COVID risk
					

Health-care workers who got the influenza vaccine were also protected from COVID-19 — but the effect might not last long.




					www.nature.com
				





> Influenza vaccines have a surprising health benefit: they might also prevent COVID-19, particularly in its most severe forms1.
> 
> A study of more than 30,000 health-care workers in Qatar found that those who got a flu jab were nearly 90% less likely to develop severe COVID-19 over the next few months, compared with those who hadn’t been recently vaccinated against flu.
> 
> The study, which was conducted in late 2020, before the roll-out of COVID-19 vaccines, is in line with previous work suggesting that ramping up the immune system using influenza vaccines and other jabs could help the body to fend off the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 1, 2022)

Novavax phase 3 trial of their (BA.1) omicron-specific protein subunit booster, NVX-CoV2515, and a bivalent (original WT NVX-CoV2373 plus NVX-CoV2515) now underway in Australia.








						Novavax Initiates Phase 3 Trial of its COVID-19 Omicron Strain Vaccine as a Booster
					

Novavax today announced the initiation of its Phase 3 strain change trial to determine if its Omicron variant specific vaccine, NVX-CoV2515 (Omicron BA.1 strain), induces superior antibody...




					ir.novavax.com


----------



## 2hats (Jun 8, 2022)

Interim data (phase 2/3 trial with 437 participants) for Moderna's mRNA-1273.214 (50µg bivalent WT+omicron spike) indicate that it induced superior neutralising antibody response against the omicron variant one month after administration (relative to original mRNA-1273). Binding antibody titres were also significantly higher against all other variants of concern (alpha, beta, gamma, delta, omicron) compared to the original formulation.




__





						Moderna Announces Omicron-Containing Bivalent Booster Candidate mRNA-1273.214 Demonstrates Superior Antibody Response Against Omicron
					

Data Show Significantly Higher Geometric Mean Titer Ratios, Meeting Prespecified Endpoints for Superiority Against Omicron Variant mRNA-1273.214 Exhibited an 8-Fold Boost in Neutralizing Geometric Mean Titers Against Omicron Among Baseline Seronegative Participants Safety and Tolerability...




					investors.modernatx.com


----------



## StoneRoad (Jun 8, 2022)

2hats said:


> Interim data (phase 2/3 trial with 437 participants) for Moderna's mRNA-1273.214 (50µg bivalent WT+omicron spike) indicate that it induced superior neutralising antibody response against the omicron variant one month after administration (relative to original mRNA-1273). Binding antibody titres were also significantly higher against all other variants of concern (alpha, beta, gamma, delta, omicron) compared to the original formulation.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


ooh, that's good news. [I'm on the uk's version of that trial !]
I wonder how long that superiority in response will last ?

e2a - changed as I'm on the UK's version ...


----------



## 2hats (Jun 8, 2022)

Note: those results are from the US phase 2/3 booster study, not the UK (NIHR) one. The full results won't be available until following analysis after 3 months post-vaccination. Moderna are releasing these preliminary results so the regulators can begin to factor them into decisions about potential boosters this coming (northern hemisphere) winter.


----------



## StoneRoad (Jun 8, 2022)

2hats said:


> Note: those results are from the US phase 2/3 booster study, not the UK (NIHR) one. The full results won't be available until following analysis after 3 months post-vaccination. Moderna are releasing these preliminary results so the regulators can begin to factor them into decisions about potential boosters this coming (northern hemisphere) winter.


Ah, OK.

But I'm still pleased at those results ...


----------



## 2hats (Jun 12, 2022)

(NIH) Another (see post #1684) MVA recombinant viral vector vaccine, this time intranasal, demonstrating strong immunoresponses, for both mucosal IgA as well as IgG, here in an animal model (mouse).
​​DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2202069119.


----------



## 8ball (Jun 12, 2022)

2hats said:


> (NIH) Another (see post #1684) MVA recombinant viral vector vaccine, this time intranasal, demonstrating strong immunoresponses, for both mucosal IgA as well as IgG, here in an animal model (mouse).
> View attachment 326903
> View attachment 326904
> DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2202069119.



What would you say if you had to summarise this information as  ,  or  ?


----------



## 2hats (Jun 12, 2022)

8ball said:


> What would you say if you had to summarise this information as  ,  or  ?


----------



## wemakeyousoundb (Jun 13, 2022)

intranasal is probably a good way to lure some of the refuseniks as well.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 13, 2022)

(LJI) An immunological evaluation of the four approved US vaccines - Moderna mRNA-1273, Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2, Janssen Ad26.COV2.S and Novavax NVX-CoV2373 - examined longitudinally for 6 months, and a comparison with convalescent immunoresponse.
​
In summary:

100% of mRNA or NVX-CoV2373 vaccinees make spike memory CD4+ T cells.
mRNA vaccines and Ad26.COV2.S induce similar frequencies of spike memory CD8+ T cells (though NVX-CoV2373 CD8s sufficient).
Infection or Ad26.COV2.S immunisation increase frequency of spike CXCR3+ memory B cells.
Antibody wanes in response to mRNA vaccines, but memory T and B cells are comparatively stable.
NVX-CoV2373 antibody titres were comparable to those induced by mRNA at 6 months.



> Across the antigen-specific immune metrics assessed, mRNA vaccines were consistently the most immunogenic, with levels higher than or equal to that of Ad26.COV2.S and NVX-CoV2373 vaccines for each immune response. NVX-CoV2373 elicited CD4+ T cell memory and neutralizing antibody titers comparably to the mRNA vaccines. The responses induced by the Ad26.COV2.S were generally lower but relatively stable. The mRNA vaccine platforms were associated with substantial declines in neutralizing antibody titers over 6 months, while memory CD4+ T cells, memory CD8+ T cells, and memory B cells exhibited small reductions (T cells) or increases (B cells). These observations appear to be consistent with the relatively high degree of protection maintained against hospitalizations with COVID-19 after these vaccines over 6 months, and the differential VE reported between mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and Ad26.COV2.S.


DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2022.05.022.

Commentary:








						LJI scientists publish first head-to-head comparison of four COVID-19 vaccines
					






					www.lji.org


----------



## 2hats (Jun 14, 2022)

(MIT/Harvard/UCLA/LJI) A comprehensive study into the difference between (mRNA mediated) hybrid (infected-then-vaccinated) and naïve vaccinee immunity, which finds that hybrid immunity offers a qualitatively improved antibody response able to better leverage Fc-effector functions against conserved regions of the virus, possibly driving more robust phagocytosis.

This study found clear differences in SARS-CoV-2 specific serum antibodies, following vaccination, between previously infected and naïve individuals, with antibody responses of greater magnitude and epitope specificity in individuals vaccinated after prior infection. Although antibody levels were similar after a second dose, several important differences persisted in Fc-receptor responses and shifts in coordination of the immune response. Previously-infected individuals had lower RBD-IgG3 levels, hinting at enhanced class-switching, and enhanced Fc-receptor binding marking the generation of potentially functionally optimised antibodies particularly targeting the highly conserved S2-domain of the spike protein.
​In convalescent vaccinees, enhanced Fc-receptor binding was skewed towards preserved sub-classes that are known to drive rapid and robust phagocytosis, perhaps enabling individuals with hybrid immunity to clear viruses and kill infected cells more aggressively, providing an advantage even in the face of the emergence of VOCs that evade neutralisation.

Whilst naïve vaccinees exhibited a S1-dominated response, likely due to the stabilisation of the spike immunogen which reduces visibility of the S2 subunit, hybrids demonstrated S2-specific Fc-receptor binding capacity expansion (which, as seen for all betacoronaviridae, has been strongly conserved across all VOCs, with only 6 substitutions in omicron).


> Given our emerging appreciation for the disease attenuating, rather than blocking, functions of S2-specific antibodies that are mediated largely via Fc-effector functions, these data argue that hybrid immune induction of potentially cross-reactive, functional antibodies to the S2 [spike subunit] may contribute to more robust protection against VOCs.


These findings may point to potential avenues of development for next generation vaccines to take.
DOI: 10.1101/2022.06.10.495727.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 15, 2022)

(Imperial/Barts/UKHSA/others) As highlighted several times before, it is apparent that your antigenic exposure history, or immune imprinting, can have an influence on your immunoresponse and outcome of infection. Here a two year study of such in healthcare workers explored their B and T cell responses to omicron/BA.1 infection.

Hybrid vaccinees (originally infected with early type) appear to have a minimal S1 immunoresponse to omicron infection (little beneficial subsequent immunity gain in this respect from an omicron infection). Prior exposure to alpha/B.1.1.7 in particular resulted in less durable S1 binding antibodies against omicron/B.1.1.529. Meanwhile, previously uninfected vaccinees, subsequently infected by omicron, developed better responses to earlier VOC but not omicron sub-lineages; their T cell recognition of omicron spike was, unexpectedly, also reduced. (Though contrast with the findings of hybrid immunoresponses and outcomes with beta/B.1.351 imprinting and note the Fc-receptor/S2 investigation highlighted above).


> In summary, these studies have shown that the high global prevalence of B.1.1.529 (Omicron) infections and reinfections likely reflects considerable subversion of immune recognition at both the B, T cell, antibody binding and neutralising antibody level, although with considerable differential modulation through immune imprinting. Some imprinted combinations, such as infection during the Wuhan Hu-1 and Omicron waves, confer particularly impaired responses.


The findings could underline why it may not be possible for a significant number of persons to build any sort of herd immunity to omicron lineage virus through [_breakthrough_] infection.
DOI: 10.1126/science.abq1841.

Overview and some commentary:








						Omicron infection is a poor booster of COVID-19 immunity | Imperial News | Imperial College London
					

People infected with the Omicron variant show poor immune boosting against future SARS-CoV-2 infection.




					www.imperial.ac.uk


----------



## elbows (Jun 16, 2022)

Are there any studies where people werent previously exposed to a previous strain or vaccinated that we can compare to that study? ie where for some subjects the very first Covid imprinted in the immune system in any way was an Omicron strain?


----------



## 2hats (Jun 16, 2022)

That study includes some (eg see figure 6). Apparent shortcomings of the study are the preoccupation with the S1 subunit and no detailed investigation of sub-classes, Fc, etc (see eg the MIT/etc study in the preceding post), so it would appear the full hybrid picture, but the poor cross-reactivity in omicron lineage is the main takeaway (also observed by Kimura/Sato and other groups at Imperial).

Separately there is a recent study from BioNTech that compared double and triple vaccinated omicron-naïves with omicron-convalescents; the outcomes are not inconsistent with any of the above but still the main takeaway is the gradual ablation of the remaining [what were] conserved RBD epitopes (again, focused in S1) and thus evasion of immunity in omicron sub-lineage development, particularly in the infection naïve. (Findings relative to naïve vaccinees: induction of broadly neutralising antibodies in omicron BA.1-convalescent vaccinees, bias towards RBD-specific B cell responses in those same individuals, elevated evasion of immunity in BA.1-convalescent vaccinees, and omicron BA.1-convalescent double-vaccinated individuals having higher frequencies of both B cells and neutralising antibody titres against previous VOCs).
DOI: 10.1126/sciimmunol.abq2427.


----------



## elbows (Jun 16, 2022)

2hats said:


> That study includes some (eg see figure 6).


I couldnt see anything in figure 6 which showed people who remained both unvaccinated and uninfected until they caught Omicron. But maybe I didnt make it clear that this is what I was after, or maybe I have misinterpreted something in figure 6. Anyway please dont spend any more time trying to answer my query, cheers for your thoughts as always.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 16, 2022)

I could imagine it might be an uphill task to assemble a sample of unvaccinated persons who first got infected by SARS-CoV-2 during the recent omicron waves, outside of newborns, those with immunodysfunction and autoimmune diseases. Circumstances which would almost certainly preclude their involvement in studies seeking insights into outcomes for the general population. You would largely be left with those objecting to vaccination who (i) would likely not be so amenable to engaging with such a study and (ii) would have tended to have been prone to (re-)infection anyway.


----------



## elbows (Jun 16, 2022)

Yes. I was interested in theory because this pandemic has given us the opportunity to get beyond overly simplistic concepts such as original antigenic sin, and explore the complex realities of immune imprinting in more suitable detail instead. And obviously we are still able to explore this subject, but widespread vaccination means certain combinations are hard to find and study by this stage. Never mind.


----------



## platinumsage (Jun 16, 2022)

2hats said:


> I could imagine it might be an uphill task to assemble a sample of unvaccinated persons who first got infected by SARS-CoV-2 during the recent omicron waves, outside of newborns, those with immunodysfunction and autoimmune diseases. Circumstances which would almost certainly preclude their involvement in studies seeking insights into outcomes for the general population. You would largely be left with those objecting to vaccination who (i) would likely not be so amenable to engaging with such a study and (b) would tended to have been prone to (re-)infection anyway.



In the UK perhaps, but not in many other countries.


----------



## elbows (Jun 16, 2022)

True. The challenge then is to find one of those countries that is then also a good candidate for actually bothering to do that sort of research with the right level of detail. The UK is reasonably good at doing such studies, especially when they can use health care workers whose history of infection and vaccination is well recorded.

So Im not sure I really expect to get useful answers to the sort of question I was poising, ie 'how will immunity to future strains differ in practice for people that didnt have contact with the original generation of vaccines or any of the pre-omicron strains?'. And I have no idea whether answers to that question will actually be interesting. I just remain broadly interested in the subject of what sort of differences we might see for people whose first immune impression of the virus is quite different to those were infected in previous waves and/or had the first gen vaccines.


----------



## elbows (Jun 16, 2022)

I suppose countries like China and Australia have far more people who wont have been exposed to the virus pre-Omicron, but then the challenge is to find enough of those that both havent been vaccinated and are in young enough age groups that age-related factors dont muddy the waters in terms of measurable immune system things.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 21, 2022)

Plausibility of Claimed Covid-19 Vaccine Efficacies by Age: A Simulation Study


> The distribution of alleged vaccine efficacies of the Sputnik vaccine by age in the phase-III trial is very unlikely to occur in genuine experimental data, even if the number of patients recruited, vaccine efficacy, and overall infection rate are true and there is no underlying difference in vaccine efficacy by age.


DOI: 10.1097/MJT.0000000000001528.

Author overview:


----------



## 2hats (Jun 22, 2022)

More results from Moderna's trial of their bivalent mRNA-1273.214 (WT+omicron/BA.1 spike) autumn vaccine booster candidate.


> One month after administration in previously vaccinated and boosted participants, a 50µg booster dose of mRNA-1273.214 elicited potent neutralizing antibody responses against the Omicron subvariants BA.4 and BA.5 in all participants regardless of prior infection. Based on this and prior data, the Company is working to complete regulatory submissions in the coming weeks requesting to update the composition of the booster vaccine to mRNA-1273.214.


At one month post-administration mRNA-1273.214 boosted neutralising titres against BA.4/BA.5 by 5.4-fold (95%CI:5.0-5.9) above baseline in all study participants regardless of prior infection history, and by 6.3-fold (95%CI:5.7-6.9) in seronegative participants.





						Moderna Announces Bivalent Booster mRNA-1273.214 Demonstrates Potent Neutralizing Antibody Response Against Omicron Subvariants BA.4 And BA.5
					

mRNA-1273.214 Exhibited a Greater Than 5-Fold Boost in Neutralizing Antibodies Against BA.4 and BA.5 Subvariants in Phase 2/3 Study Data Being Submitted to Regulators and for Peer Reviewed Publication CAMBRIDGE, MA / ACCESSWIRE / June 22, 2022 / Moderna, Inc., (NASDAQ:MRNA) a biotechnology...




					investors.modernatx.com
				




Their CEO hopes they will be ready to ship mRNA-1273.214 in August.








						Moderna CEO: COVID variant vaccine to be ready for shipping in August
					

Moderna's COVID-19 variant vaccine will be ready to ship in August as the company has been making shots ahead of approval, Chief Executive Stephane Bancel told Reuters on Wednesday, adding that the only bottleneck to supply was a regulatory one.




					www.reuters.com
				




Moderna also announced plans to establish an mRNA Innovation and Technology Center in the UK, including a state-of-the-art mRNA vaccine manufacturing facility.





						Moderna Announces Plan to Bring mRNA Innovation to the United Kingdom
					

Manufacturing facility would provide access to domestically manufactured vaccines against respiratory viruses Moderna would expand its presence in the UK through investments in RD activities and capabilities Collaboration would support the UK with direct access to rapid pandemic response...




					investors.modernatx.com


----------



## 2hats (Jun 23, 2022)

Valneva's whole virus, inactivated, adjuvanted vaccine candidate, VLA2001, now one step away from EMA regulatory approval.








						Valneva Receives Positive CHMP Opinion for Marketing Authorization of its Inactivated COVID-19 Vaccine Candidate in Europe - Valneva
					

The Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has recommended marketing authorization in Europe for Valneva’s inactivated whole-virus COVID-19 vaccine candidate, VLA2001, for use as primary vaccination in people from 18 to 50 years of age.




					valneva.com


----------



## 2hats (Jun 25, 2022)

Pfizer/BioNTech results for their omicron-spike tuned autumn vaccine booster candidates, BNT162b2 OMI (monovalent BA.1 spike based) and bivalent (BNT162b2 + BNT162b2 OMI, ie WT+BA.1).

They were found to be well tolerated, with good immunogenic responses measured for both (note: neutralising titres only). Unsurprisingly the monovalent performed better against BA.1.


> One month after administration, a booster dose of the Omicron-adapted monovalent candidates (30 µg and 60 µg) increased neutralizing geometric mean titers (GMT) against Omicron BA.1 13.5 and 19.6-fold above pre-booster dose levels, while a booster dose of the Omicron-adapted bivalent candidates conferred a 9.1 and 10.9-fold increase in neutralizing GMTs against Omicron BA.1. Both Omicron-adapted vaccine candidates were well-tolerated in participants who received one or the other Omicron-adapted vaccine.
> 
> In a SARS-CoV-2 live virus neutralization assay tested on sera from participants over 56 years of age and older, sera efficiently neutralized BA.4/BA.5 with titers approximately 3-fold lower than BA.1.








						Pfizer and BioNTech Announce Omicron-Adapted COVID-19 Vaccine Candidates Demonstrate High Immune Response Against Omicron | Pfizer
					

Omicron-adapted monovalent candidate given as a fourth booster dose elicited a 13.5 and 19.6-fold increase in neutralizing geometric titers against Omicron BA.1 at 30 µg and 60 µg dose levels; bivalent vaccine candidate exhibited a 9.1 and 10.9-fold increase against Omicron Geometric mean ratios...




					www.pfizer.com
				




This coming week the FDA will discuss options, considering Pfizer, Moderna and Novavax omicron-spike tuned candidates, with a view to recommending which variant(s) should be in an autumn booster.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 25, 2022)

2hats said:


> Valneva's whole virus, inactivated, adjuvanted vaccine candidate, VLA2001, now one step away from EMA regulatory approval.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


VLA2001 now approved for use throughout the EU.








						Valneva Receives Marketing Authorization in Europe for Inactivated Whole-Virus COVID-19 Vaccine VLA2001 - Valneva
					

The European Commission has granted marketing authorization in Europe for Valneva’s inactivated whole-virus COVID-19 vaccine, VLA2001, for use as primary vaccination in people from 18 to 50 years of age.




					valneva.com


----------



## 2hats (Jun 26, 2022)

2hats said:


> Interim data (phase 2/3 trial with 437 participants) for Moderna's mRNA-1273.214 (50µg bivalent WT+omicron spike) indicate that it induced superior neutralising antibody response against the omicron variant one month after administration (relative to original mRNA-1273) ...


Preprint for the full results of this Moderna mRNA-1273.214 bivalent (WT/B.1.1.529 spikes) 50µg booster candidate study now available.


> In conclusion, the omicron-containing bivalent vaccine mRNA-1273.214 had a safety and reactogenicity profile similar to that of the current booster vaccine mRNA-1273 when administered at the 50-μg dose. mRNA-1273.214 elicited a superior neutralizing antibody response against omicron, compared to mRNA-1273, and potent neutralizing antibody responses against the BA.4 and BA.5 omicron subvariants 28 days after immunization. Antibody responses were also higher against the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 (D614G) and multiple additional variants [alpha, beta, gamma, delta]. These results are consistent with the evaluation of our first, beta-containing, bivalent vaccine which induced enhanced and durable antibody responses against multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants and bivalent vaccines can be a new tool as we respond to emerging variants.


DOI:10.1101/2022.06.24.22276703.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 28, 2022)

The US FDA's vaccine advisory committee have just voted 19 to 2 (zero abstentions) in favour of recommending inclusion of a SARS-CoV-2 Omicron component for COVID-19 booster vaccines in the US.
​
No clear decision on what particular omicron variant sub-lineage spike this would be.

Representatives from Pfizer said it could have product available in the first week of October, whilst Moderna said it could have updated vaccine available "at large scale" in late October, early November.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 28, 2022)

2hats said:


> Interesting new results from Moderna which would appear to corroborate the above work by Sigal (AHRI) on beta/omicron antigenic history.


Underscoring this further, these results are interesting, suggesting beta spike could be advantageous in a booster (perhaps not surprising given pandemic dynamics in South Africa). Possibly the ideal formulation in a polyvalent might be original WT spike plus beta plus omicron (plus perhaps the most antigenically diverse spike, determined by mapping, up to the time of production).

Results from trials of Sanofi/GSK's adjuvanted recombinant protein-based bivalent vaccine candidate (WT plus beta/B.1.351 spike), MVB.1.351.








						Sanofi-GSK first to report a successful efficacy study against Omicron with COVID-19 Beta-containing vaccine | GSK
					

First ever reported efficacy data in an Omicron environment support relevance of a Beta-containing vaccine




					www.gsk.com
				




e2a: Details in this NEJM correspondence (where comparison was made with the original WT spike formulation, MVD614):


> Over the short term, heterologous boosting with the beta-adjuvanted MVB.1.351 vaccine resulted in a higher neutralizing-antibody response against the beta variant as well as against the original strain and the delta and omicron BA.1 variants than did the mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 or the MVD614 formulation. *The use of new vaccines that contain beta spike protein may be an interesting strategy for broader protection against SARS-CoV-2 variants.*


DOI:10.1056/NEJMc2206711.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 30, 2022)

In a recent presentation Pfizer/BioNTech have indicated that they are working on a T-cell targeting pan-coronavirus vaccine to be available (presumably at least for trials) before the end of the year.
​


----------



## 2hats (Jul 15, 2022)

New clinical data for Moderna's bivalent omicron (BA.1) booster candidate, mRNA-1273.214 (50µg). One month post-administration it elicited significantly higher neutralising antibody responses against the omicron variants BA.4 and BA.5 than the original vaccine (mRNA-1273).

Moderna intend to make two bivalent booster candidates available this autumn. mRNA-1273.214 (25µg original plus 25µg BA.1 spike) for the UK/EU/Australia, and mRNA-1273.222 (25µg original plus 25µg BA.4/5 spike) for the US (to satisfy FDA requirements).





						Moderna's Omicron-Containing Bivalent Booster Candidate, mRNA-1273.214, Demonstrates Significantly Higher Neutralizing Antibody Response Against Omicron Subvariants BA.4/5 Compared To Currently Authorized Booster
					

mRNA-1273.214 has now demonstrated significantly higher antibody titers against all tested variants, including Omicron BA.1 and BA.4/5 subvariants, ancestral virus, Alpha, Beta, Delta, and Gamma Moderna has completed regulatory submissions for mRNA-1273.214 in EU, UK, and Australia, expects to...




					investors.modernatx.com


----------



## 2hats (Jul 20, 2022)

CDC approves Novavax NVX-CoV2373 as a two-dose primary series in the US. Doses will be shipped within days.








						Novavax says U.S. FDA clears COVID vaccine doses for release
					

Vaccine maker Novavax on Tuesday said that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration had cleared a lot of its COVID vaccine for release in the United States, and it plans to ship doses to be distributed by the U.S. government in the coming days.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## 2hats (Jul 28, 2022)

(Crick/Imperial/Osaka/UCL) A S2 subunit based pan-coronavirus DNA vaccine study demonstrated encouraging results in an animal model, able to neutralise the seasonal ‘common cold’ coronaviruses HCoV-OC43/HCoV-HKU1/HCoV-229E/HCoV-NL63, (original) Wuhan type SARS-CoV-2, D614G lineages from the first wave (B.1.1), alpha/B.1.1.7, beta/B.1.351, delta/B.1.617.2, omicron/B.1.1.529 and two bat coronaviruses (SL-CoV-WIV1, CoV-RaTG13).
DOI:10.1126/scitranslmed.abn3715.

Commentary:




__





						Promising developments in pursuit to design pan-coronavirus vaccine
					

Researchers at the Crick have shown that a specific area of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is a promising target for a pan-coronavirus vaccine that could offer some protection against new virus variants, common colds, and help prepare for future pandemics.




					www.crick.ac.uk


----------



## rubbershoes (Jul 29, 2022)

Interesting stuff but I don't know anyone who's been offered any sort of booster for months. Last one was my elderly mum who got one in about January


----------



## Aladdin (Jul 29, 2022)

rubbershoes said:


> Interesting stuff but I don't know anyone who's been offered any sort of booster for months. Last one was my elderly mum who got one in about January



Everyone in Ireland over 65 or over 12 and immunicompromised were offered boosters in May and June. 
And the  gov is thinking of opening that up to 50 to 65 yr olds too


----------



## rubbershoes (Jul 29, 2022)

Aladdin said:


> Everyone in Ireland over 65 or over 12 and immunicompromised were offered boosters in May and June.
> And the  gov is thinking of opening that up to 50 to 65 yr olds too



There's been talk of over 50s in the UK getting one but it hasn't happened yet. I worked at a vaccination centre in 2021 and would expect to be contacted if the centres were opening up again


----------



## Chilli.s (Jul 29, 2022)

rubbershoes said:


> There's been talk of over 50s in the UK getting one but it hasn't happened yet.


I think its getting rolled out with the winter flu jab, so autumn


----------



## Aladdin (Jul 29, 2022)

rubbershoes said:


> There's been talk of over 50s in the UK getting one but it hasn't happened yet. I worked at a vaccination centre in 2021 and would expect to be contacted if the centres were opening up again



Our vacc centres have not closed.  They're vacc all the time. Walk ins for those who were never vacc. 
And boosters for anyone needing them or called for them. 

Talk if another vacc rollout in late Sept / early Oct


----------



## 2hats (Aug 14, 2022)

(Various) As noted previously, eg in the Com-COV2 study: mixing of vaccines due to issues of availability/supply in Argentina has provided a nice illustration of the effective immunogenicity of a heterologous primary vaccination series. The graphical abstract says it all (almost) - that heterologous regimens are at least as, if not more effective than, a homologous series. mRNA (mRNA-1273) vaccination after other type was always most efficacious.
​Two points to bear in mind: (1) this is only measuring neutralising antibodies (IgG spike), it is not an epidemiological study demonstrating efficacy against disease or efficacy of other aspects of the immune system (innate immunity, T cells, Fc/effector functions, ...), and (2) in Argentina dosing intervals were extended several weeks (eg here variously 5-11 weeks between doses) which is also known to improve immunoresponse.
DOI:10.1016/j.xcrm.2022.100706.


----------



## 2hats (Aug 15, 2022)

UK MHRA approves bivalent Moderna mRNA-1273.214 (WT and omicron/B.1.1.529 spikes) as a booster in 18+ year olds.




__





						Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) Authorizes Moderna's Omicron-Containing Bivalent Booster in the UK
					

Study results show mRNA-1273.214 has demonstrated significantly higher antibody titers against Omicron BA.1 and BA.4/5 subvariants when compared with mRNA-1273 CAMBRIDGE, MA / ACCESSWIRE / August 15, 2022 / Moderna, Inc . (NASDAQ:MRNA), a biotechnology company pioneering messenger RNA (mRNA)...




					investors.modernatx.com


----------



## elbows (Aug 15, 2022)

Yay. And here is the BBC version of that news:









						Covid: UK first country to approve dual-strain vaccine
					

The upgraded vaccine tackles both the original Covid virus and better protects against the Omicron variant.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## 2hats (Aug 15, 2022)

The JVCI have published more details of the autumn booster programme.

Notably, as well as giving the nod to bivalent Moderna mRNA-1273.214 (WT/B.1.1.529), they have now finally approved use of the Novavax (Nuvaxovid) protein subunit vaccine, NVX-CoV2373, for persons aged 18+ (note: the autumn booster campaign is for 50+, C[E]V, carers and health and social care staff) .








						JCVI publishes advice on COVID-19 vaccines for autumn booster programme
					

All of the available boosters provide good protection against severe illness from coronavirus (COVID-19).




					www.gov.uk


----------



## 2hats (Aug 26, 2022)

Moderna is suing Pfizer and BioNTech (in the US and Germany), alleging various mRNA vaccine technologies patent infringement.








						CNN Breaking News (@cnnbrk)
					

Moderna files lawsuits against Pfizer and BioNTech claiming patent infringement over Covid-19 vaccine technology https://cnn.it/3dZoNDT




					nitter.it


----------



## 8ball (Aug 26, 2022)

2hats said:


> Moderna is suing Pfizer and BioNTech (in the US and Germany), alleging various mRNA vaccine technologies patent infringement.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Pfft!


----------



## l'Otters (Sep 2, 2022)

This is possibly a bit pre emptive, but it occurred to me the other day: 

Being in a category of people who are offered the vaccine earlier, also means you get it when it’s not really known how well that vaccine will work against whichever variant is dominant by the time the rollout is going. The data on that gets collected after enough people have had that vaccine whilst immersed in whatever flavour viral soup this country is having that season. 

With the booster last winter, omicron appeared around when I might have had some protection from that vaccine. I booked to go to a few gigs and planned some social stuff. Then everything changed. And by the time things settled down and the waning effect was understood, I was well outside of that period. It seems like people who were offered the booster in spring of 2022 were better able to benefit from it. 

It’s pretty selfish / self serving to look at it this way but I am wondering if am offered the next booster in the early stage of the rollout this autumn, should I actually hang on for a few weeks / months to see what kind of benefits it’ll give. It doesn’t seem like predicting that effect is going to be possible. 

Dunno. Just thinking out loud really.


----------



## l'Otters (Sep 2, 2022)

It’s impossible to predict anything with this virus though isn’t it? 

Eg… Say there’s a new variant about in the UK come October. Say you had a booster vaccination and then were exposed to that version of the virus a couple of weeks later and the recent vaccine helped prevent you getting sick from it. If you were exposed to that variant again a few months later and that vaccine’s effects had waned, the previous infection wouldn’t make any difference? That’s my understanding of what omicron has been like.


----------



## elbows (Sep 2, 2022)

The analysis they can do about those things tends to paint a rather broad picture that offers some clues that have significance when it comes to the whole population level, and related stuff such as overall hospital demand, and planning what frequency of vaccination they should attempt.

And there is a relationship between the overall risk picture and what that means for individuals, but its not really possible to translate the overall risk assessments into a guide as to the risks to specific individuals at a particular moment in time. There are people who on paper might have anticipated being well protected via optimal number and timing of doses, who were still killed by this virus during the theoeretical windows of maximum protection. And this was not a surprise. Plenty of those people would have theoeretically been at greater overall covid risk for well known reasons, such as their age or specific medical conditions, but still this is not a perfect guide, the reality isnt quite that neat for every individual, only for the overall numbers when we look at large numbers of people and can identify patterns.

When it comes to waning the picture is also not as neat and simple as it may be in some peoples minds. We can see patterns where the waning protection against infection is more obvious than the waning of protection against hospitalisation, and where the waning of protection against death is weaker still. And so far we have not allowed very large periods of time to pass between vaccination doses for the people more at risk due to age, so we havent allowed these signals to be magnified to a much greater extent. And experts and professionals dont find it easy to all come to the same conclusions about what the optimal or necessary dosing schedules are. eg some think that continued boosters beyond the first ones are a big waste if given to huge numbers of people, they suspect that protection will generally remain good enough for several years. In some of these areas we will probably get to find out, in others the risks will not be taken that would enable us to find out.

And of course yes changes to the virus also further complicate this picture. Omicron caused authorities convern because it always takes time to truly discover how the theoretic risks of evasion from vaccine protection compared to the actual evasion seen in practice. Perhaps its fair to say that Omicron worst case scenarios did not materialise when it came to immune escape from protection against serious illness and death, and that boosters with non-Omicron-specific vaccines were enough to offset a big chunk of these bad consequences. In terms of its ability to evade immunity from infection and mild disease, clearly Omicron was bad enough to change the game on that front, to give us many waves with really huge number of people getting infected. And such things caused all bets to be off in terms of some assumptions they hoped to be able to get away with when it came to how many waves we might get per year, and the size of those waves, and how often individuals might expect to get infected. Stuff that has implications for ongoing pressure on health services, even when they've managed to dodge a large public debate about that in this country this year.


----------



## elbows (Sep 2, 2022)

In terms of your thinking out loud about whether to try to manipulate the timing of when you get a vaccine dose, there are so many potential factors, lots of luck is involved, and there are no guarantees that what you and authorities will eventually discover will tell you that you were right to delay, it might just as likely reveal that you should have got another vaccine ASAP. And certain things might be revealed that the authorities wont be able to act upon during that vacination cycle anyway, eg if it turns out that a different sort of vaccine would be better, but it wont be available in time to protect masses of people against that wave. Or things that are down to random chance, such as if various different types of vaccines are in the system at the same time, but you have no choice as to which one happens to be available at the vaccination centre you happen to attend on a particular day.

I'm a simple case of a middle aged person whose only been offered 3 doses so far. I may as well describe what happened to me in terms of luck and timing for those first three doses, as just one example of how this stuff can play out:

I dragged my heels a bit when it came to booking first vaccine, because I was keen for more nerdy detail to emerge, and because I could effectively hide from the virus in the meantime, and could avoid being a potential vector of transmission to any relatives that were more at risk than me. That initial deliberate delay of some weeks happened to, by chance, enable me to end up getting a dose of Pfizer rather than Oxford Astrazenica. But this wasnt planned, it just turned out that way because by the time I booked my first vaccination they had decided not to give the Oxford vaccine to people a bit younger than me, and people in that age group were allowed to book fro the very first time on the very same day I happened to finally get round to booking.

By the time I could get my second dose, there was some early evidence that perhaps quite a long gap between first two doses had benefits for the amount of protection that may be afforded. So I was going to wait the fill 12 weeks. But then some things happened which made the authorities reduce that gap, and there were concerns about a resurgence in the virus, so I decided to go along with that and reduce the gap.

The same thing happened with my third dose. I was going to leave the full gap, especially as I still wasnt exposing myself to risky situations. But then concerns about Omicron loomed large on the authorities radar, and I decided to do what they wanted and get my third dose in December rather than dragging things out till early the next February.

Timing issues that I had relatively little control over for all 3 of those doses is that my periods of theoretical best protection were out of sync with other family members due to differences in age and medical conditions between us. eg my parents and brother were eligible for vaccination far ahead of me, so by the time I got a dose they had already entered a period where waning concerns had grown. Hopefully this was more of an issue for first few doses, and magnitude of potential waning/differences in protection against severe disease and eath isnt as great once 2+1 doses were done, but cannot really be sure that we'll never end up totally out of sync in a way that has significant implications ever again. Although as the authorities plan currently stands, I dont get another dose this winter and the rest of them do, and if this plan sticks then we wont find out if this plan had any big mistakes in it for some time, will either find out with much hindsight or they will get clues that make them change the plan (eg age cutoff) again at some point.

When making those latter timing decisions I had to balance various things including optimal protection, protection timing compared to next wave timing, timing the authorities preferred, ease of availability of booking slots and vaccine system capacity, what timing seemed like the best for broader society, what timing my family preferred. And people sometimes have other practical timing considerations too, eg having particular events on the calendar for which they didnt want to be suffering any post-vaccination symptoms, or wanted to feel like they were most protected for.


----------



## elbows (Sep 2, 2022)

Oh and one unknown at this stage is the extent to which the updated Omicron-specific vaccine will actually be available for the vaccination programme this winter. Its been approved, but its far from clear what the supply and logistics will be like, what proportion of people will end up being given that version, whether any fancy criteria are used eg prioritising certain groups for that version, or whether its ends up more down to random chance as to who gets what. Or indeed how much difference it ends up making.


----------



## platinumsage (Sep 3, 2022)

elbows said:


> Oh and one unknown at this stage is the extent to which the updated Omicron-specific vaccine will actually be available for the vaccination programme this winter. Its been approved, but its far from clear what the supply and logistics will be like, what proportion of people will end up being given that version, whether any fancy criteria are used eg prioritising certain groups for that version, or whether its ends up more down to random chance as to who gets what. Or indeed how much difference it ends up making.



Supply isn't a problem apparently, everyone will get the omicron-specific vaccine. They already have millions of doses of the Moderna bivalent vaccine with millions more on the way. It seems the BBC have put some articles out implying otherwise by saying stuff like this:

"The NHS says Moderna's new bivalent vaccine will be used for autumn boosters, 'subject to sufficient supply'. The UK is the first country to approve the dual vaccine. However, health officials say people should take whichever booster they are offered, as all vaccines provide protection against becoming severely ill or dying from Covid."

However there's no actual anticipated supply problems, so I wouldn't take routine arse-covering as implying something else


----------



## platinumsage (Sep 3, 2022)

.


----------



## elbows (Sep 3, 2022)

Cheers for the info. I expect the arse-covering came from the relevant authorities and the BBC just ran with it.

For example the following stuff was included in announcements, presumably because they dont want people quibbling or delaying their vaccination if they arent offered the updated vaccine for any logistical reason:

NHS England:





__





						NHS England » NHS to roll out variant busting booster jab from September ahead of winter
					






					www.england.nhs.uk
				






> The NHS will offer people the new next generation bivalent vaccine where appropriate and subject to sufficient supply being made available to the NHS.
> 
> The JCVI and MHRA have stressed that the original vaccines also continue to provide great protection and people should come forward regardless of vaccine offered.



Government statement in relation to England:






						A guide to the COVID-19 autumn booster
					






					www.gov.uk
				






> As we cannot predict which variants of COVID-19 will be circulating this winter, the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) have concluded that both types of vaccine can be used in adults, and that no one should delay vaccination to receive combination vaccines. So you will be offered the right vaccine for you at the right time.



From NHS England » NHS to roll out variant busting booster jab from September ahead of winter

JCVI advice was pretty conservative in terms of them saying they didnt have a huge amount of data about how much better the new vaccine will be compared to the older ones. I might quote some of that stuff in a bit but  part of the aim is not to make the older vaccines sound undesirable. But its pretty standard stuff, its what we would expect from them.


----------



## elbows (Sep 3, 2022)

Pfizers bivalent vaccine has also now gained approval, this document was published today:









						Pfizer/BioNTech bivalent COVID-19 booster approved by UK medicines regulator
					

The adapted COVID-19 vaccine targets both the original virus and the Omicron variant




					www.gov.uk


----------



## platinumsage (Sep 3, 2022)

elbows said:


> Cheers for the info. I expect the arse-covering came from the relevant authorities and the BBC just ran with it.
> 
> For example the following stuff was included in announcements, presumably because they dont want people quibbling or delaying their vaccination if they arent offered the updated vaccine for any logistical reason:
> 
> ...



Yes exactly, the BBC didn't inquire behind the scenes to determine what the actual supply situation looked like, so someone reading their articles might think that there was an actual intention to offer the old vaccines to some people. On the other hand the PA etc seem to have checked: "The new bivalent booster has been developed to target both the original strain of the virus and the Omicron variant. The NHS does not expect supply to be an issue and all of those eligible are expected to receive the variant-busting jab."


----------



## elbows (Sep 3, 2022)

Any initial doubts about available supply of different types of vaccine could also have led to the resulting practical implications being compounded by the fact that the August JCVI statement placed quite a lot of emphasis on simplicity in addition to timeliness. They seemed to be leaning towards sticking with the original vaccine if enough doses of bivalent vaccine to completely cover this seasons programme had not been assured, although in that respect they were also totally hedging their bets even if it meant somewhat overriding the option they describe as 'desirable', of using just one sort of vaccine. They were covering all possibilities I suppose, with the further get out of 'operational considerations', and again emphasised what advice the public should receive, that timeliness trumps type of vaccine.



> Timeliness of vaccination is more important than the type of booster vaccine used. The key priority of the autumn programme should be for eligible individuals to be offered a booster vaccine dose to increase their immunity against severe COVID-19 (hospitalisation and death) ahead of winter 2022 to 2023, as described in the previous advice of 15 July 2022.
> 
> Simplicity is central to an efficient vaccination programme. Deployment of a single type of vaccine throughout the autumn booster programme promotes simplicity and is therefore desirable. If sufficient doses of mRNA bivalent Original ‘wild-type’/Omicron BA.1 vaccine become available to complete the autumn booster programme, JCVI considers that it is expedient to aim to offer authorised bivalent vaccines throughout the autumn programme, subject to operational considerations. Where substantial delays might be incurred in deploying a bivalent vaccine, the principle of timeliness should take priority and an alternative UK-approved booster vaccine offered, such as a monovalent Original ‘wild-type’ mRNA vaccine. Individuals offered vaccination should be advised that timely boosting is desirable to increase protection over the winter, and therefore to accept whichever booster vaccine is offered.







__





						JCVI statement on the COVID-19 booster vaccination programme for autumn 2022: update 3 September 2022
					






					www.gov.uk


----------



## 2hats (Sep 3, 2022)

A couple of studies of relevance to booster vaccines.

(NIH) A study which indicates that B-cell responses to booster vaccines are impeded by recent infection. Vaccinated persons with no prior infection, or persons infected 180 days or more prior to boosting produced greater immunoresponses (IgG NAbs*) than those boosted within 180 days of an infection (or, possibly similarly, repeatedly boosted at short intervals). Likely this is related to the 'blunting' anticipated by Crotty et al and an illustration of the advantage of permitting adequate time (6-9 months) for full affinity maturation (here described as allowing sufficient time for various B cell types to return to optimal resting states in order to best respond to a booster dose).
DOI:10.1101/2022.08.30.22279344.
(* Insert usual warning that other measurements of immunity are available.) 

(UCT/Karolinska/Imperial/ETH/others) This small study _might_ suggest cross-immunity for BA.2.75 acquired from BA.1/BA.2 is better than that acquired from BA.4/BA.5. This _might_ make for some difference in outcomes between eg EU v US (BA.1 v BA.5 bivalent late-2022 booster) if BA.2.75[.x] proves to be as aggressive as it might appear.
​DOI:10.1016/S1473-3099(22)00524-2.


----------



## elbows (Sep 5, 2022)

China has approved an inhaled vaccine as a booster:









						China approves inhaled Covid vaccine
					

Inhaled as a fine mist, Convidecia Air can provide good protection after just one breath, its maker says.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## 2hats (Sep 5, 2022)

elbows said:


> China has approved an inhaled vaccine as a booster:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Recombinant human adenovirus-5 vector-based vaccine, Ad5-nCoV-S, expressing Wuhan-type spike protein.


----------



## l'Otters (Sep 5, 2022)

elbows said:


> China has approved an inhaled vaccine as a booster:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I applied to join a clinical trial for an inhaled vaccine but couldn’t make the follow up appointments work. It was a shame because they wanted people who hadn’t had a positive covid test for it & I gather this is a bit harder to find now.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 5, 2022)

elbows said:


> China has approved an inhaled vaccine as a booster:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



To be fair, they had a bit of a head start.


----------



## elbows (Oct 11, 2022)




----------



## elbows (Oct 26, 2022)

I cant say I'm surprised that some studies seem to be suggesting that prior immune system imprinting could be an issue thats limiting the ability of updated vaccines to induce really impressive immune response against newer strains. Any thoughts 2hats ?



> Our data demonstrate that both monovalent and bivalent mRNA boosters markedly increased antibody responses but did not substantially augment T cell responses. BA.5 NAb titers were comparable following monovalent and bivalent mRNA boosters, with a modest and nonsignificant trend favoring the bivalent booster by a factor of 1.3. These findings are consistent with data recently reported for a BA.1-containing bivalent mRNA booster. Our findings suggest that immune imprinting by prior antigenic exposure may pose a greater challenge than currently appreciated for inducing robust immunity to SARS-CoV-2 variants.











						Immunogenicity of the BA.5 Bivalent mRNA Vaccine Boosters
					

Waning immunity following mRNA vaccination and the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants has led to reduced mRNA vaccine efficacy against both symptomatic infection and severe disease. Bivalent mRNA boosters expressing the Omicron BA.5 and ancestral WA1/2020 Spike proteins have been developed and...




					www.biorxiv.org


----------



## cesare (Oct 26, 2022)

Immune system imprinting?


----------



## elbows (Oct 26, 2022)

cesare said:


> Immune system imprinting?



Also referred to by people including me as 'original antigenic sin'. The idea that the first version of a virus that our bodies encounter is imprinted rather strongly into our immune system, and that there are challenges in getting our immune system to respond as well to fight later versions of the virus that evolve. Historically this subject tended to come up when discussing new strains of influenza that arrived via pandemics, and this phenomenons role in the age profile of those most at risk from the new strain of influenza that had arrived. To give one classic example, if you were born during a period where H1N1 was the only A strain circulating in humans, and so H1N1 flu was the first influenza A your body had to deal with, your immune response to a later version of flu such as H3N2 wont be the same as someone younger whose first ever exposure to influenza involved H3N2.

The subject is bound to be more complicated than the simplistic descriptions of it that I might give, and various articles I could point to tend to focus on particular circumstances at the time. It is relevant to covid both via peoples history of which covid strains they were infected with, and via which strains their bodies were exposed to via vaccination.

In this particular case, they are looking at vaccines that have been updated to include an Omicron strain, and how well that addition is performing at 'training' your immune system to deal with these later Omicron strains. When their data indicates that protection against particular Omicron strains is not highly significantly better via the updated vaccine than it would have been via vaccination with just the original strain, they are reaching for the immune imprinting issue as an explanation.

Some example articles of past instances where issues relating to this have been looked at in this pandemic:









						Immune imprinting causes varied patterns of protection against COVID-19 variants | Imperial News | Imperial College London
					

Research shows that the first SARS-CoV-2 spike protein a person encounters, be it by vaccination or infection, shapes their subsequent immune response




					www.imperial.ac.uk
				












						Immune imprinting and SARS-CoV-2 vaccine design
					

Reformulating severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines with variant strains is being pursued to combat the global surge in infections. We hypothesize that this may be suboptimal due to immune imprinting from earlier vaccination ...




					www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
				












						Immune imprinting: A key issue for COVID-19 vaccines
					

The phenomenon of immune imprinting may influence the evolution of future COVID-19 vaccines, but why and how? Medical News Today asked the experts.




					www.medicalnewstoday.com


----------



## 2hats (Oct 26, 2022)

elbows said:


> I cant say I'm surprised that some studies seem to be suggesting that prior immune system imprinting could be an issue thats limiting the ability of updated vaccines to induce really impressive immune response against newer strains. Any thoughts 2hats ?


Already identified as a potential problem (some months ago - I've posted hints about this before).

On a quick read of that preprint: I note that the dosing intervals here seem pretty short and the pause for sampling post-last-booster very short, so inadequate time for affinity maturation could well be a factor. Also, no effort made to establish precise antigenic history (at N=18+15 it's not like the samples are that big; they could have made the effort to profile everyone). There are clearly 2-3 subjects who are always outliers at the top end of the various measured immunoresponses. What's the betting those individuals got infected in the first WT waves and then immunised 1+years later (maybe even further infected with more antigenically diverse variants), ie are possessed of strong hybrid immunity, higher affinities, broader responses? I would guess that this issue will not matter so much for immunocompetents with adequate exposure intervals (and am not yet convinced the bivalent offers any advantages to such, particularly original infection-then-vax hybrids‡).

‡ Might even be somewhat disadvantageous.


----------



## cesare (Oct 26, 2022)

Thank you both


----------



## 2hats (Nov 9, 2022)

(Yale) A recombinant unadjuvanted sub-unit intranasal spike vaccine (P&S - featuring hexapro trimeric prefusion stabilisation of WT spike) elicits protective mucosal immunity against both SARS-CoV-2 and broader sarbecoviruses when administered as a 'booster' following completion of a primary intramuscular mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine series. In an animal model this prime and spike approach induced robust B and T cell responses, IgA at the respiratory mucosa, and protected against lethal SARS-CoV-2 infection, particularly where administered with adequate delay. Immunoresponses were enhanced and broadened further where using a heterologous spike protein (P&Sx - a recombinant using prefusion stabilisation of SARS-CoV spike).


> Here we describe the preclinical development of an alternative vaccine strategy, P&S [Prime and Spike], whereby [intranasl] unadjuvanted spike subunit protein elicits robust protective mucosal immunity following mRNA-LNP parenteral immunization.


​DOI:10.1126/science.abo2523.


----------



## 2hats (Nov 22, 2022)

(Novavax) An extended phase 2 study of NVX-CoV2373 (original WT formulation only) as a fourth dose (second booster), each booster administered at 6 month intervals after the primary series (1283 original participants, aged 18-84 years, located in Australia and the US, all screened for previous infection via testing for anti-N; mean age of the fourth dose cohort, N=45, was 55 years). Serology conducted 14 days after the final booster dose.

The fourth dose improved neutralisation titres to BA.4/BA.5 by a ten-fold factor over the original primary series, ultimately being within 3.5x the neutralisation titres to Wuhan type largely recovering much of the immunogenicity.
 ​


> A fourth dose of NVX-CoV2373 enhanced immunogenicity without increasing reactogenicity. Antigenic cartography demonstrated a more universal-like response against SARS-CoV-2 variants [BA.1/BA.4/BA.5] after a fourth dose of NVX-CoV2373, indicating that updates to the vaccine composition may not be warranted.


DOI:10.1101/2022.11.18.22282414.


----------



## 2hats (Nov 25, 2022)

Not SARS-CoV-2 directly related as such but worth mentioning somewhere...

(UPenn) A universal influenza mRNA multivalent vaccine candidate (20-HA mRNA, encoding hemagglutinin antigens from all 20 known influenza A and B virus subtypes), which elicited high levels of cross-reactive and subtype-specific antibodies in animal models, indicative of a good immunoresponse to all encoded antigens.
​DOI:10.1126/science.abm0271.

Commentary and news media:









						Researchers test mRNA technology for universal flu vaccine
					

An experimental vaccine provided broad protection against all 20 known influenza A and B virus subtypes in initial tests in mice and ferrets, potentially opening a pathway to a universal flu shot that might help prevent future pandemics, according to a U.S. study published on Thursday.




					www.reuters.com
				










						Universal flu vaccine may be available within two years, says scientist
					

Vaccine against all strains of virus hailed as major step in protecting against potentially devastating flu pandemic




					www.theguardian.com


----------

