If a vaccine is approved

[BlueBlancmange]

Up until now I have assumed that even if one vaccine is approved, research into others will continue. However I didn't really think much more deeply about how this would be possible. Assuming one vaccine proves to be effective, then every one would ideally need to get that vaccine and so there would be no one left to continue trials using placebos with. This wouldn't be a problem if the first vaccine were 100% effective, but say we get one that is only partially effective how could there then be any way to conduct research into a better one?

This has suddenly concerned me. Am I misunderstanding something?

On second thoughts I suppose you would still be able to use volunteers to test a second hopefully improved vaccine giving some a placebo, even if they had already had the initial vaccine. You would still be able to ascertain whether there was an improvement. Am I right?

Not everyone wants the vaccine (unfortunately). No vaccine works 100%. Some vaccine research will stop but others might go on for the simple reason that they could provide for part of the population who is allergic to an ingredient in vaccine number one or to be less expensive (although oxford is already making quite a cheap one). A partially effective vaccine could mean that people still get infected but don't get as severely ill, which would be a great result actually but could be improved upon. There might also be improvement possible for certain groups of people (for instance older people tend to react less strongly to vaccines in general). They could also try to improve on the vaccine in a way that it will also (partially) work for other corona strains.

@rorosemary

Not everyone wants the vaccine (unfortunately). No vaccine works 100%. Some vaccine research will stop but others might go on for the simple reason that they could provide for part of the population who is allergic to an ingredient in vaccine number one or to be less expensive (although oxford is already making quite a cheap one). A partially effective vaccine could mean that people still get infected but don't get as severely ill, which would be a great result actually but could be improved upon. There might also be improvement possible for certain groups of people (for instance older people tend to react less strongly to vaccines in general). They could also try to improve on the vaccine in a way that it will also (partially) work for other corona strains.

I know. My question concerns how further trials would be conducted after an initial vaccine has been administered to the population.

Trial teams have already been thinking about it (for months) and have contingencies built in.

I know. My question concerns how further trials would be conducted after an initial vaccine has been administered to the population.

Not much different than now. There are plenty of people who won't have it now and plenty who can't have it now. I doubt that they'll test it on pregnant women so they'll have to wait till after birth for example.

@rorosemary

I know. My question concerns how further trials would be conducted after an initial vaccine has been administered to the population.

Not much different than now. There are plenty of people who won't have it now and plenty who can't have it now. I doubt that they'll test it on pregnant women so they'll have to wait till after birth for example.

Any one who won't have it is not likely to be prepared to participate in future research though. And I don't know how large of a group of volunteers you would be able to find who simply aren't able to currently have it for one reason or another.

I assume it would be a case of administering a second vaccine to people who have already had the first, but if the first has done a reasonable job of reducing transmission, this is surely also going to make measuring the effectiveness of any subsequent vaccines more difficult.

My question concerns how further trials would be conducted after an initial vaccine has been administered to the population.

I think you are underestimating quite how long it will take to administer the vaccine to so many people. While the first one is being manufactured and administered the others will continue with their trials.

It’s a good question and you are not fundamentally understanding anything.

In the short/medium term as ChloeCrocodile says there will be a lag in vaccinating the population, so some of those willing but not yet reached may enter trials.

As you also say there will be an assessment on trialling on patients who have been previously vaccinated especially if immunity is short lived or less efficacious. There will be a benefit to doing this if the population is widely vaccinated as that is the ‘real life’ scenario where a vaccine would potentially be rolled out.

Trials will be done in countries who have not had extensive vaccination.

@ChloeCrocodile

My question concerns how further trials would be conducted after an initial vaccine has been administered to the population.

I think you are underestimating quite how long it will take to administer the vaccine to so many people. While the first one is being manufactured and administered the others will continue with their trials.

Yes, even in the US for example, if a vaccine is available by the end of the year they will only have enough to vaccinate less than 10% of the population and would take another 6 months to vaccinate the whole country.

mobile.twitter.com/scotthensley/status/1301583940898217990

So that's up to 6 months or 9 months starting now, for other trials plus trials in other countries.

Well the Russians will test in Russia, and Venezuela. The Americans aren't going to give any to anyone except Americans (maybe Canadians but unlikely considering Trump). And so on.

They won't be rolled out until there's one that's 'won'.

Weelllll

In general there is an agreement that whoever gets it first will share the info to maximise production.

The USA has said they won't do that. Because, dosh.

I would personally say that if a vaccine is found it needs to be rolled out in countries which have large populations without access to much in the way of healthcare.

EG India has a billion people, many rural.
Cities in South America with large slums etc etc

I expect I would not be in step with people around that.

So in a way. My ire at USA seeking to get there first and charge the world. Is hypocritical if as a Brit, we would see to our population first before people in more dire conditions in other countries.

Maybe I'm wrong. Thoughts on that?

I would personally say that if a vaccine is found it needs to be rolled out in countries which have large populations without access to much in the way of healthcare.

To be fair, that's the US. Plus older, obese and with risk factors.

In Africa the spread has been wide but people are skinny, young and don't seem to die in large numbers.

The problem with India is that the government is corrupt. They have a thriving pharmaceutical industry. It was valued at US$33 billion in 2017 and generic drugs account for 20 per cent of global exports in terms of volume, making the country the largest provider of generic medicines globally.

By the looks of things the Oxford vaccine will be first. If it is i cant say it would be wrong to vaccinate the UK first.
Trump is only in a rush to get the vaccine as a polical move after he screwed up so badly.

@NiceGerbil Hi. I find it quite literally amazing how easily people are brainwashed by propaganda through the mainstream media about Covid19, although fear and deception are very powerful tools for controlling people with. This is just another classic case of 'Problem, Reaction, Solution' by the Elite. One thing you can be sure of though - The vaccine will be voluntary at first, but it will also be linked to payment systems eventually. No one will be able to buy or sell anything without it, or travel without it, so inevitably it will become mandatory. Stop blindly believing what your government is telling you, and if you have an open mind, do your own research to discover the truth.

I thought the Oxford vaccine only prevented severe illness rather than prevent infection. Can't keep up, though.

Until the trials are unblinded no-one knows how well the Oxford vaccine works and whether it will produce a neutralising effect or disease limiting effect (or not work at all although I think this is unlikely).

Contingencies will have been built into the trial planning. It seems likely to me that countries that have not had immediate access to the vaccine will be used for ongoing trials. In a population that is largely vaccinated there is unlikely to be sufficient virus circulating for phase 3 trials (that require a certain number of people to actually catch the virus).

I believe the hope is for several vaccines to treat different people with different medical needs, not a one fits all type.

I expect the earliest vaccines to come out may not be the must efficacious compared to those that land later.

There will be significant lag between administering to priority groups and everyone getting it.

I wonder how vaccines for other diseases worked? Plenty of them would not have significant infected populations to test on.

There are 3 vaccines apparently very close to being ready. These are the Oxford one, the Moderna one and the Pfizer/BioNTech one. All three could be ready to go later on this year. There are multiple trials going on all around the world.

Don't forget, countries have pre-bought up millions of doses for when vaccines are hopefully ready to go. Not every country will necessarily use the same vaccine (well Russia and China are already using their own).

Do watch Dr John Campbell's video on this subject, it's very hopeful and explains a lot:

One thing you can be sure of though - The vaccine will be voluntary at first, but it will also be linked to payment systems eventually. No one will be able to buy or sell anything without it, or travel without it, so inevitably it will become mandatory.

Utter scaremongering rubbish.

[quote WordWarrior]@NiceGerbil Hi. I find it quite literally amazing how easily people are brainwashed by propaganda through the mainstream media about Covid19, although fear and deception are very powerful tools for controlling people with. This is just another classic case of 'Problem, Reaction, Solution' by the Elite. One thing you can be sure of though - The vaccine will be voluntary at first, but it will also be linked to payment systems eventually. No one will be able to buy or sell anything without it, or travel without it, so inevitably it will become mandatory. Stop blindly believing what your government is telling you, and if you have an open mind, do your own research to discover the truth.[/quote]
Yes, because that is exactly what has happened with vaccines for every other infectious disease we've ever encountered, isn't it?

Ahh, the dreaded 'Elite'......

This isn't really any different to any disease where a potential new treatment comes along - you stop comparing against the placebo (no treatment) and start comparing the two treatments against each other to see which is more effective.

@Reallybadidea

This isn't really any different to any disease where a potential new treatment comes along - you stop comparing against the placebo (no treatment) and start comparing the two treatments against each other to see which is more effective.

Yes this kind of occurred to me after I posed the question. Although, if as hoped the initial vaccine decreases the incidence of the disease, then I assume this will be another hurdle in measuring the efficacy in further trials.

Another thing, I can see how they will be able to measure how effective the vaccine is in preventing infection in people who have taken it, but how will they ascertain whether it prevents people from infecting others?

[quote CrunchyCarrot]There are 3 vaccines apparently very close to being ready. These are the Oxford one, the Moderna one and the Pfizer/BioNTech one. All three could be ready to go later on this year. There are multiple trials going on all around the world.

Don't forget, countries have pre-bought up millions of doses for when vaccines are hopefully ready to go. Not every country will necessarily use the same vaccine (well Russia and China are already using their own).

Do watch Dr John Campbell's video on this subject, it's very hopeful and explains a lot:

[/quote] Thanks I did actually watch this and while it gives me a great deal of hope it is part of what made me think of how further trials would be conducted.