Do you think the government/scientists must be confident about the Oxford vaccine to keep mentioning it?

[Whatsthis1515]

Just that really. Don't know how to expand on my question

I’m a rather lapsed scientist but scientists in general are quite a cautious bunch so some scientists may think these are our best bet at the moment. But others are wanting to see the data and analyse it for themselves - everything’s being done at such speed that the usual (slow) peer review process isn’t happening so much.

The government will be wanting to shout about what they’re doing in terms of investment and probably give people hope.

But I think it’s all too early to be making too much of it. Quiet optimism that options are being investigated actively and all the progress made so far by researchers across the globe is phenomenal. That gives me more hope than putting all my eggs in one basket!

I think they are confident but the biggest question is how long the trials take. They need to check both that the vaccine works and that it is safe. Monkey trials suggest that it works, but the most important thing is whether it works and is safe in those who are vulnerable to the disease - the elderly and those with underlying conditions. These groups are likely to both have a weaker immune response, are riskier to run trials on and may be more sensitive to any side-effects.

Although I really want the virus to work, it will take time to have a vaccine that is safe and effective for those groups who are at risk from Covid.

For example....

Does anyone know of a good article about it? I'm wondering how they test it without exposing the volunteers to the virus, especially given the reducing cases and social distancing.

The guardian had a good podcast with one of the Oxford team. The volunteers are exposed by being out in the community, they have tried to recruit medical staff to the study to increase the chances of exposure in the course of their normal activities. I’ll see if I can find a link to the podcast.

www.theguardian.com/science/audio/2020/may/13/covid-19-do-we-need-more-than-one-vaccine

No I think they are desperate for a way out so are cluntching at any possibility personally 😂! They did the same with anti body testing which was going to be a game changer until the who told them antibodies did not necessarily make them immune.

I think the oxford trial may work but September is a pipe dream. Listen to every leading scientist in America scorn trump When he talks of a vaccine this year!

No-I think they are clutching at straws to try to persuade people back to work.

@Letseatgrandma I’ve seen this argument a few times and I don’t really understand it. Why would there being a vaccine available in a few months entice people out of lockdown now? Wouldn’t they be more inclined to think “Great, vaccine in September! We’ll just sit it out and keep the DC home until then!”

I would have though people would be more inclined to accept an exit from lockdown if they thought a vaccine was a long way off or unlikely?

I’m fairly optimistic if a vaccine in the medium term and I’m very hopeful that Oxford can pull it off but I think September is ambitious.

Average vaccine development time is over a decade. An Ebola vaccine managed it in five. 33.4% of vaccines which go to trial are successful enough to make it into production.

New Scientist: Why it’ll still be a long time before we get a coronavirus vaccine

I think it’s over-optimism bordering on propaganda tbh.

Boris has recently been keen on taking a (watered down) leaf out of the Trump playbook. This is no more than that.

No. I think they are blurring the lines between competence and confidence to keep the masses happy.

Well my head says no but my heart says yes!!!

@JessicaDay

Some of the information in that New Scientist article is already outdated. We know that manufacturing has been scaled up already before the vaccine has even been approved, so that it’s ready to go, at a huge financial risk. We also know that the Oxford vaccine draws on a successful MERS vaccine which has been researched for four years.

Hmm. Good question. One minute they are saying we are very hopeful of getting a vaccine by the end of this year, the next, Boris is saying 'we might never have a vaccine'. Very mixed messages, but yes, on the one hand sending the message that there is light at the end of the tunnel, whilst on the other hand 'don't get your hopes up too high!'

A vaccine rolled out by September? How can that possibly be tested sufficiently?

I’m not a fan of this government or BJ but I really don’t understand the propaganda argument? What is the logic behind that thinking? I’m quite willing to be persuaded!

I dont know why they are saying it, yes tell us there is hope, there is tests etc but September?if i had children I may now be much more inclined to wait until September for this vaccine before i sent my kids back. Is that what the aim is? Or did they mean they would have the capacity for a vaccine?

I have no idea if they are confident or not but if they keep mentioning it perhaps it's because they hope the light at the end of the tunnel will keep the masses adhering to the lockdown for longer?

I think the idea that the govt - lousy though their handling of this crisis has been - are engaged in some sort of propaganda exercise on the basis of a single cautiously optimistic press briefing, is a bit 'out there'. If nothing else, I'm not sure what they would stand to gain from it. Plus, it's not only them being somewhat optimistic - the Oxford group themselves have made similar noises, and scientists are famously cautious.

The EMA says that in the best-case scenario, a vaccine could be approved in the spring of 2021.

I think Spring 2021 would be brilliant!

They do underline that that is only if all goes ideally, and it could easily be later. Does seem more optimistic than "there will never be a vaccine" at least, though!

The Oxford vaccine is repurposed - it's previously been used as the base for other vaccines. This gave them a head start on proving safety for humans, and has helped them to cut down on time - they've done what would normally take 3 years since 11th January when they started.

The pertinent question is probably how much protection individuals get from this vaccine, and for how long. (EG if it turns out to be 3 months then it will be next to useless.) Which is why it's so important that a variety of vaccines are developed, since it won't be clear up front which last the longest.

The government needs to show that it’s doing something/give enough hope to stop people from killing themselves. That’s why they made the June 1st announcement. It was pretty obvious that there was never any real intention to start sending children back to school in June 1st. They just said it to get people through the month. In a couple of weeks they’ll say another two weeks at the least to keep people going again and so on until they actually decide to let schools go back. The government has been very easy to read on this one. For a politician, Boris Johnson seems to find it surprisingly difficult to lie.

I'd assumed it was to give people hope.

And possibly, to distract attention away from the negative "lockdown relaxing" and "should we be opening schools" news that was otherwise prevalent.

When I've seen scientists pushed on news programmes, they've been quick enough to say that this is best case scenario but it's early days yet.

There’s no guarantee with any of this obviously but I think even a suggestion that it might be realistically a possibility is pretty great.