Jump to content

Coronavirus II, the Vitamin D-free discussion thread.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

14 hours ago, iain said:

For me I’d rather read the summary of efficacy and safety as on the licences when granted, the SMPC.( Summary of product characteristics. )

Iain
 

Indeed. There seems to be some credible suggestion that the Oxford/AZN press release glosses over some serious shortcomings in the trial protocols and it's even being mused that their vaccine may not get FDA approval for the States (which in turn would presumably cripple it for public acceptance and use in other territories, including maybe the UK.

I hope that's not so, but this Wired article makes disturbing reading:

https://www.wired.com/story/the-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine-data-isnt-up-to-snuff/ 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading that, there is a lot of classic NIH. Not Invented Here. Complaining that it was not "a" trial as it was conducted in two locations: UK and Brazil. In my humble opinion, multiple locations are better than one. The more locations, the wider the scope of ethnicity, environment and application. I want to see all vaccines tested across the planet on a representative sample of the global population.

Mick

Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter,

They tried to recruit me for the local arm of a vaccine trial, so our age group will be tested.     I failed the inclusion criteria, because I'm on a platelet inhibitor - presumably they feared 'bruising' as a side efect!!

The Pfizer vaccine is said to be effective in over-65s:  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54986208

The Oxford vaccine investigators showed " that older adults aged 56-69 and over 70 had a similar immune response to younger adults aged 18-55".   https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54993652

You may say that is just from press releases, so look at https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32466-1/fulltext  This study included 200 over-70s and "Neutralising antibody titres after a boost dose were similar across all age groups (median MNA80 at day 42 in the standard-dose groups: 18–55 years, 193 [IQR 113–238], n=39; 56–69 years, 144 [119–347], n=20; and ≥70 years, 161 [73–323], n=47; p=0·40)"

So, looking good, despite the usual dterioration in immune response with age.

John

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bleednipple said:

Indeed. There seems to be some credible suggestion that the Oxford/AZN press release glosses over some serious shortcomings in the trial protocols and it's even being mused that their vaccine may not get FDA approval for the States (which in turn would presumably cripple it for public acceptance and use in other territories, including maybe the UK.

I hope that's not so, but this Wired article makes disturbing reading:

https://www.wired.com/story/the-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine-data-isnt-up-to-snuff/ 

IF....big IF the allegations made in that article are true, then we should have grave concerns.   However, I am deeply suspicious of the US regulatory system and also US medical journals alleged independence of Pharma. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope you are not suggesting that the article contents may have been influenced by Pfizer and Moderna, who might be driven by their desire to make a few $bn from their very expensive vaccines. Shock, horror, whatever next?

Mick

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Telegraph:

... AstraZeneca may run further trials to assess the efficacy of its Covid-19 vaccine, the company's chief has said, after experts raised concerns over the validity of its data.

AstraZeneca and Oxford University on Monday reported that a lower initial dose of the vaccine, followed by a full dose, produced a 90 per cent efficacy rate, compared with 62 per cent for two full doses.

However, Moncef Slaoui, the scientific head of the US's Operation Warp Speed - the programme to supply America with vaccines - told US reporters that the half-dose regime, which was discovered by accident, was only given to adults aged 55 and under - throwing the validity of the results into question...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in no hurry to get vaccinated. I feel a little better now that Trump and his enablers will not be part of the process but the whole thing seems rushed to me and the AZ affair did not help. I'll wait and see how things go with the first few million people and maybe think about getting vaccinated in March or April if things are going well.  I can maintain the current face mask, social distance, hygiene thing for a long time.

The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are both mRNA based, the AZ is a weakened cold virus that has been engineered to present the spike protein to your system. So I'm also curious to see the difference in how people react to the injections and if we will in fact have any choice.

Stan

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the 1/2 dose group were all <50 yrs old ( as DT reported) and that achieved 90% efficacy becuase of their age ( rather than becuase of dose) then the 62% efficacy in Brazil must have been pulled down from 90% because of the oldies in the test. That means that effciacy in oldies may be mcuh lower than 62%. 

Indeed , we must see the full age-profile of efficacy.

Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please familiarise yourself with our Terms and Conditions. By using this site, you agree to the following: Terms of Use.