Oxford vaccine

[Thehairyqueenofscots]

Been told at work we will be getting this at next round of vaccinations. It always seems to be high regarded on here so I'm quite pleased about this. Would you have a preference or not bothered?

Can you show that modelling Oaktree and explain what you would like to happen

As I have said my belief is that a mixture of vaccines should be rolled out depending on need for me (someone who has had it and for whom it wasn’t in the top 4 illnesses is under 50 with no preexisting conditions) a 50-70% efficacy vaccine that can be rolled out by spring and enable my life and that of my children to get back to normal is fine
Eradication of coronavirus is impossible it will continue to be a cause of death and a childhood illness. Like a lot of things are

Then depending on immunity time is then around to come up with the most effective vaccination programme

But please show your data I would be interested to read it - all the modelling I have balances efficacy and community spread and numbers vaccinated. If Oxford can be done quickly

I don’t save what I read. Follow the scientists on Twitter there is a lot of information there and yes it’s widely discussed how this problem with lower efficacy of adenovirus vaccines was anticipated and how 62% efficacy isn’t enough hence I guess why the trials are starting to look at priming the Oxford Vaccine with an mRNA one. I’m not making this up. People should read expert opinion (not mumsnet) and educate themselves on the situation. Personally I find it shocking that the Oxford Trial has been so poor it probably wouldn’t have passed a Year 7 Science Test. Schoolboy errors all the way through.

I also find the passive aggressive tone of many on here irritating. It’s impossible it seems to call a spade a spade and point out facts. Everything needs to be appropriately worded with positive spin and delivered in a saccharine sweet way. I think it’s appalling facts aren’t being conveyed correctly. Our Gov went to our hallowed Institution Oxford and though “ok they’ll save the day”. In their pursuit of “saving” (we’ve moved on from conquering) the world, they have potentially left us in a big hole with an inferior vaccine and muddied message/reporting with their desire to be in 90% club. Hey we’re British though so it must be good right? Even if it doesn’t do what it’s meant to as well as it’s competitors, let’s focus on its cheapness and ease of transport. What do you reckon will happen if there are a couple more cases of Transverse Myeletis in early roll out? What will we be left with then. I think they should be ordering more mRNA even if we’re back of the queue. You watch this one play out over next few months.

@Oaktree55

I also find the passive aggressive tone of many on here irritating. It’s impossible it seems to call a spade a spade and point out facts. Everything needs to be appropriately worded with positive spin and delivered in a saccharine sweet way. I think it’s appalling facts aren’t being conveyed correctly. Our Gov went to our hallowed Institution Oxford and though “ok they’ll save the day”. In their pursuit of “saving” (we’ve moved on from conquering) the world, they have potentially left us in a big hole with an inferior vaccine and muddied message/reporting with their desire to be in 90% club. Hey we’re British though so it must be good right? Even if it doesn’t do what it’s meant to as well as it’s competitors, let’s focus on its cheapness and ease of transport. What do you reckon will happen if there are a couple more cases of Transverse Myeletis in early roll out? What will we be left with then. I think they should be ordering more mRNA even if we’re back of the queue. You watch this one play out over next few months.

I find your aggressive aggressive tone irritating, and the way you're dismissing the aim to find a vaccine that could help developing countries.

Whether any roll out achieves 90% + efficacy will be hugely affected by stability and storage. It's dangerous to ignore practical factors, they will affect efficacy.

A combination of vaccines is needed. Many, many people on these boards are medical/scientifically qualified and well read and can identify issues with the trials, the results and the vaccines. However, I would question whether someone who says about a peer-reviewed paper in a leading journal 'I find it shocking that the Oxford Trial has been so poor it probably wouldn’t have passed a Year 7 Science Test. Schoolboy errors all the way through" reads papers critically, fairly and analytically.

@cathyandclare absolute rubbish. The expert opinion is there on line to read. Oxford Trial has been a total hash from start to finish. They erroneously injected circa 3,000 people with the wrong dose of an experimental vaccine. They’ve dug around with dodgy statistically unsound data and cherry picked till they’ve been able to find some data justifying 90% plus just for press release.

As I said read up people don’t rely on anonymous accounts on here. It’s all there for the reading! Anyway said my bit if someone chooses to read up on the detail then that’s one more educated person.

Honestly I’ve seen you on several threads and I’ve become a bit suspicious. The other big pharma companies don’t want Oxford to work, they want to be able to sell their expensive vaccine across the world. And you’re repeating their spiel. It’s more than a little odd.

I'm a medic. I've read the papers, the opinion and much more.

What will happen to those of us with an allergy ? I carry an Epipen for wasp sting allergy, and I am really worrying now that I have seen that it appears to rule me out for the Pfizer vaccine.

Personally I find it shocking that the Oxford Trial has been so poor it probably wouldn’t have passed a Year 7 Science Test. Schoolboy errors all the way through

Oh, give over.

I just discount what Oaktree says, they just come across as rather rabid and seem to have an agenda

@SirVixofVixHall

Please see there's a thread that is discussing allergies and Pfizer

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/coronavirus/4101860-Regulators-warning-over-possible-allergic-reaction-to-Pfizer-jab-if-you-have-significant-allergies?msgid=102468863#102468863

@Oaktree55 the Oxford trial is a separate subject to stating that a vaccine efficacy of 62.5% would not work based on modelling

You seem to have it in your head that efficacy is the be all and end all whereas actually it isn’t

From the Telegraph:

Some researchers believe the Oxford jab may actually perform better than the 62 per cent efficacy rate suggests. Nobody in the vaccine arm became seriously ill or needed hospital treatment.

Mark Woolhouse, Professor of Infectious Disease Epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said: “I don’t think we should get too hung up on the numbers.

“My understanding is that in none of the trials anybody in the vaccine arm went to the hospital arm and died. That's a lot more than 62 per cent, so that's a 100 per cent benefit, but the problem is the numbers were small and the trials were not designed to answer the question how good these vaccines are at keeping people out of hospital and dying.”

The Oxford trial did show that 90 percent efficacy was achieved in a small part of the trial where participants were accidentally given a half dose in for their first injection, followed by a full dose several weeks later.

But the numbers were small and researchers said they could not substantiate the result. The half-dose arm also did not include enough older people for it to be licensed for the most vulnerable, so is unlikely to be approved in the elderly, if at all.

Several experts believe it could be a risk giving very vulnerable people a less effective vaccine, but that it ultimately may come down to availability, and ease of roll-out.

Dr Julian Tang, Clinical Virologist at the University of Leicester, said: “One might argue that 50-60 per cent protection might be better than none.

“But will there be a risk in terms of the behaviour of those vaccinated who may not actually be protected, as they behave more freely and expose themselves more to others, thinking they are protected?

“From the interviews that I’ve heard from those who have received the vaccine already - almost certainly yes - as they see the vaccine as a way to get their freedom back.

“The problem with this at the moment is that the virus is still very widespread in the community - so the chances of exposure are high.”

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/12/11/governments-oxford-vaccine-dilemma-better-wait-give-people/

Sums up my feelings. It looks like should be usable but those severe cases are tiny on the placebo side, so can we be sure?

Does Oaktree work for Pzfizer? Their determination to rubbish the Oxford vaccine at each and every opportunity goes above and beyond someone altruistically campaigning for mumsnetters to get the best vaccine possible I admire their dedication To the cause but a little suspicious of the motives

It’s not really just a case of ‘reading up’, you need to go through several stages of appraisal. The first being a bit of digging around to find out whether your ‘scientist’ might have some conflicts/ prior experience or employment/ sponsorship/ professional or financial interests. Never take anything on face value. Big pharma is big business and has all sorts of tricks and fudges to make their figures look better but the mhra are very skilled and experienced people in finding them!

There are downsides with all the vaccines. I am personally not totally convinced by an efficacy that is only based on a couple of hundred cases across placebo and treatment arms. Especially when these didn’t take into account the practical problems with transportation and storage (which could potentially render effectiveness reduced to 0).
When it comes down to having it myself my first concern is safety. I’m not fixed on any one of them, I feel fairly confident of taking any of the European/ US vaccines. I’m less keen on the others because I’m not sure how rigorous their standards and regulations are

@sashagabadon

Does Oaktree work for Pzfizer? Their determination to rubbish the Oxford vaccine at each and every opportunity goes above and beyond someone altruistically campaigning for mumsnetters to get the best vaccine possible I admire their dedication To the cause but a little suspicious of the motives

Yeah, I'm not normally one for questioning the motives of posters, but this person is extremely adamant and even aggressive. I've also seen them bring up the alleged crappiness of the Oxford vaccine on threads where it's not even being discussed. I'm sure there are genuine issues with the Oxford vaccine but this person goes beyond reasonable scepticism.

Which is why vaccines should be done alongside a period of concerted effort to get community transmission down low even a 95% efficacy one is going to have failures on a place of high transmission

If I were in charge if Oxford came through I would go to a partial lockdown with secondary schools on online learning (primary/nursery open) everywhere in tier 3 for a six week max effort vaccination programme with the vulnerable/over 65s getting Pfizer and the 20-65s getting Oxford vaccine so at the end vaccination is complete and transmission driven down and we can exit to a 2-3 month transistion to normal life by May/June

Maybe Oaktree went to Cambridge?

I am personally not totally convinced by an efficacy that is only based on a couple of hundred cases across placebo and treatment arms. Especially when these didn’t take into account the practical problems with transportation and storage (which could potentially render effectiveness reduced to 0).

This is my feeling. If my neighbour who lives alone and works from home was part of the trial and got the real vaccine while my friend across the road with the dozen or so strong blended family where all the adults are key workers was in the placebo group this would skew the results somewhat.

@notevenat20

Maybe Oaktree went to Cambridge?

Well at the very least didn’t get a place at Oxford.

But this would be the case for all trials. Not unique to Oxford. An argument for scale I suppose to even out the chances of all the real vaccine volunteers sitting at home while the placebo candidates wander around, get on public transport etc

@SirVixofVixHall

What will happen to those of us with an allergy ? I carry an Epipen for wasp sting allergy, and I am really worrying now that I have seen that it appears to rule me out for the Pfizer vaccine.

There has been a warning issue to GPs and vaccination sites about anaphylaxis and the vaccine. It relates to people with allergies to food, medicine and vaccines. It is specific to Pfizer.

But it’s worth checking with your GP

sasha that wasn't a criticism of Oxford trial specifically. The case numbers are equally small in the Pfizer results despite a 40,000 trial. It is only based on 1 month of full data so presume trial cases will grow over time. The other implication is that they only have evidence for efficacy over a 1 month time frame.

Not only trial cases but non-trial cases too I guess and they will definitely have had the vaccine

Thank you truly and Lemon