Oxford initial news

[tobee]

Covid-19: Oxford University vaccine shows 70% protection www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55040635

It’s like saying the U.K. has manufactured the Vauxhall Corsa and isn’t that great because the factory can knock out 200 a day and Germany’s manufacturing BMW but they can only make 5 a day as they’re more luxurious. I’d prefer the BMW please! I don’t think that’s unreasonable 😊

@IcedPurple yes it’s amazing we’ve got vaccines a real achievement. You can’t knock me for wanting the best one!

Good read forblueskies

what was interesting though is that the Oxford Vaccine picked up all postitives so its effacy is based on asymptomatic cases whereas the other two only picked up those tested for symptoms so they are actually directly comparable either

@Quartz2208

Good read forblueskies

what was interesting though is that the Oxford Vaccine picked up all postitives so its effacy is based on asymptomatic cases whereas the other two only picked up those tested for symptoms so they are actually directly comparable either

Forgive me if I'm going the wrong way but if the other two had tested everyone every week too they may have picked up asymptomatic cases and therefore their efficacy could have been less?

I think it’s bloody marvellous. £3 a dose and willing to send it worldwide, and they’ve already started checking the dose situation so it will hopefully be up to 90%. For a brand new virus to have 3 vaccines available against it so quickly is amazing. Our government may not be world beating, but some people in other sectors are.

@Quartz2208

Good read forblueskies

what was interesting though is that the Oxford Vaccine picked up all postitives so its effacy is based on asymptomatic cases whereas the other two only picked up those tested for symptoms so they are actually directly comparable either

That is a big difference, I think?

I feel like I need a good (radio) programme on all this dc too loud today could only catch parts

Also on the one time thing is this something they knew before starting? Is it typical of that kind of vaccine

...so many questions

if the other two had tested everyone every week too they may have picked up asymptomatic cases and therefore their efficacy could have been less?

This is significant.

The Oxford vaccine kept 100% of participants out of hospital.

Has Pfizer and Moderna released how many people were hospitalised during their trials?

I want that has the best chance of keeping me out of hospital, looks like its the Oxford one.

@ForBlueSkies just occurred to me. What if the 1/2 dose lucky accident arm was U.K. which reading between lines it is. Then we’re comparing U.K. 90% low community incidence to Brazil 60%. That doesn’t seem to work to my mind

@newstart1337

The Oxford vaccine kept 100% of participants out of hospital.

Has Pfizer and Moderna released how many people were hospitalised during their trials?

I want that has the best chance of keeping me out of hospital, looks like its the Oxford one.

Summary attached.

@Covidfears earlier on you were saying everything the U.K. does is shit. Now you're saying "a bit shit" So it's obviously growing on you then.

It's also a bit depressing if the US won't license the Astra Zeneca vaccine. It being cheaper. You read American news reports talking about their population who are likely to miss out on vaccines because they can't afford healthcare. The US likes to make their medicines nice and expensive so big pharma can make large amounts of money. They don't want cheaper versions in competition.

If I’m right and the 90% arm was all U.K. then I’m
not a statistician but you can’t compare that to Brazil. We’ve got totally different demographics, far lower incidence etc. I hope I’m wrong but if I’m not watch them walk it back to 60%.

There so much rubbish on here frequently. If you read that piece from the Daily Telegraph where the analyst said it unlikely that the Oxford/Astra Zeneca vaccine will be unlikely to be licensed in the US, the headline actually says others say that that analyst is premature in their conclusions:-

Also, a while ago, people were expecting vaccines weren't going to happen, woyld take 10 years, would only prevent severe disease, would only show 45% efficacy etc

It's still early days and we shall see

“It’s like saying the U.K. has manufactured the Vauxhall Corsa and isn’t that great because the factory can knock out 200 a day and Germany’s manufacturing BMW but they can only make 5 a day as they’re more luxurious. I’d prefer the BMW please! I don’t think that’s unreasonable“

Except to use your analogy, currently nobody has a car and nobody can go anywhere even though they desperately want to. We can either give people a mix of bmw and corsas and be able to go places by around Easter or we can have a few people in BMWs and everyone else still carless and unable to go anywhere for many months more as we wait for BMWs to be supplied to lots of other countries as well/first and try to work out how to carefully deliver everyone their BMW in a complex supply chain where is must be kept very frozen at all times. Add in most people don’t know enough about cars to understand the difference between a corsa, a bmw or a bicycle and the fact that it’s not even yet clear that the corsa is in fact a corsa not a Ferrari in disguise (likewise the bmw could be a Lada with a badge)..... honestly I’ll just take what I’m given as fast as possible and look forward to being able to drive a car by Easter while most of the world waits months, potentially years.

allCoffeeandCroissant
So you post a quote showing amongst the Pfizer vaccine participants there was a serious case of Covid. Whilst amongst the Oxford trial participants their was zero serious cases.

Looks like the Oxford vaccine is better.

@newstart. The Pfizer group was twice the size and had one single severe case. You can't really draw conclusions from that. (I'd take either quite happily, and don't expect we'll be offered a choice)

[quote Oaktree55]@ForBlueSkies just occurred to me. What if the 1/2 dose lucky accident arm was U.K. which reading between lines it is. Then we’re comparing U.K. 90% low community incidence to Brazil 60%. That doesn’t seem to work to my mind[/quote]
I’ve been reading up on this on Twitter and it has me concerned. Lots of chatter in the scientific community that there may be disparities in location/surge timing between the two groups that could invalidate the good result in the “happy accident” arm.

It’s not clear if the larger arm was Brazil + U.K. or just Brazil. It is clear that the smaller accidental subset was U.K. only, and that it began at the end of April. Given it takes six weeks from the first shot to initial protection that means that group came online in summer, when the U.K. was experiencing low cases.

I hope we get a full breakdown and more details soon.

[quote Firefliess]@newstart. The Pfizer group was twice the size and had one single severe case. You can't really draw conclusions from that. (I'd take either quite happily, and don't expect we'll be offered a choice) [/quote]
Completely agree

[quote Firefliess]@newstart. The Pfizer group was twice the size and had one single severe case. You can't really draw conclusions from that. (I'd take either quite happily, and don't expect we'll be offered a choice) [/quote]
The Pfizer and Moderna numbers include the control group but the Oxford numbers are just the numbers who had the actual vaccine.

There was also a trial in USA which was paused and a group in South Africa who's results aren't included in those numbers.

I'd like to know if they're looking at the entire control group when they talk about the 90% effective arm or just the control in the UK. Either way they say there needs to be more testing on that and that it could be not that it is

theconversation.com/pfizer-vaccine-what-an-efficacy-rate-above-90-really-means-149849

Is really interesting because I do think we lose sight of what effacy means and we don’t currently know the effectiveness

I would be interested as well in the age data from both - the trials are different and may not produce the same results in the real world

That and the effacy we need for a vaccine to work (alongside our natural immunity etc) is 50%

I get the impression people actually believe the vaccine will eradicate this (it won’t the smallpox vaccination program took years).

The aim is to reduce spread and seriousness and allow a return to normal life (with clusters that can be tested and controlled) and allow are natural response to do the rest. We are speeding up the endemic process

Agree Quartz on what we are aiming for

I’m interested to know how they will tackle the dose issue and further testing (how long)

Personally, I think it would be a good idea just to wait until the data is released and has been peer reviewed and then take a view. I'm not sure that hypothetical problems identified on Twitter are really going to add much at this stage.