Vaccine discussion - What research is out there? (title edited at OP's request)

[GoneCrazy]

A new variant:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56233038

And the most used vaccine here is AstraZeneca Oxford. Our elderly and most vulnerable seem to have been vaccinated with the least effective of the vaccines.

Will we be able to control the risk of the variants?

We need to support the world in upping its speed of vaccination. At what point should we be really giving our excess vaccine to other countries for the greater good?!

If other countries are not vaccinated at the same time what is the point of us being ahead if we let in new variants?

Just a few of the million questions I have around vaccines and our programme.

@PuzzledObserver

All approved vaccines have been shown to reduce the risk of hospitalization and death dramatically; AZ was shown in the Scottish data to be very slightly more effective than Pfizer with the over 80s and MHRA findings report due next week apparently says they're pretty much identical. That real world data doesn't exist for any other vaccine including Moderna, Novovax and Janssen. Only 241 million doses have been given in total in the world, 8.6% of them in the UK. Under 2.5% of the world population have had a first dose vaccine but 30% of UK citizens, under 0.5% of the world population have had a second dose vaccine but 1.2% of UK citizens. That is why there simply isn't enough data yet to say if any vaccine is better for different groups in the real world than another beyond allergy avoidance. The best vaccine is the one in your arm and second best is the one in the arms of those around you. It's as breathtakingly entitled to bitch about the brand as it is arrogant to believe you know more about efficacy than the epidemiologists and virologists working on vaccine approval.

The UK is the world leader in genome testing, having provided nearly half the samples, and is using the testing to provide scientists with the new variant RNA required for boosters. That capability is being used in surge testing to wipe out new variants wherever they arise; and to be clear, E484K has arisen many times independently already including in the UK, so low cases are much more important than closed borders. Regarding E484K variants, there isn't much by way of trial data because only Novovax and Janssen ran stage 3 trials; it's expected that AZ, Pfizer and Moderna will still protect against severe disease but have reduced efficacy, that's why they are all working on boosters. Mixed vaccine trials will also be great, to see if the combined effect increases, as well as to see if it matters which booster you get, or if everyone just gets the first available. New manufacturing facilities have opened across the UK to ensure self-sufficiency in getting those boosters made and into arms as soon as needed. We're in the best position we can be at the moment, and it's on everyone not to fuck it up by irresponsible posts suggesting vaccines don't have the effectiveness that's already been proven.

Thank you @MRex!

@mrex thank you. I have reported this thread already. It is breathtaking indeed.

It's as breathtakingly entitled to bitch about the brand as it is arrogant to believe you know more about efficacy than the epidemiologists and virologists working on vaccine approval.

and it's on everyone not to fuck it up by irresponsible posts suggesting vaccines don't have the effectiveness that's already been proven.

Really the scientific community needs to now fight back at this armchair speculation which is all very well if it is not incorrect, sensationalist, rich world entitled and cost lives. I have had enough of ‘polite debate’ if it is based on bullshit.

@GoneCrazy but you were the one who started this thread with a title that is click bait fodder.

I don’t think at any point I have said I know more than anyone? I’ve sent articles I have read. It’s not click bait. It’s for people to discuss. Are we at a point where free speech is prohibited? That people are not allowed to discuss something just because we don’t have the knowledge. Hasn’t the strength of this thread been the opportunity for people to put their thoughts forward and to gain an understanding? To gain some reassurance.

What concerns me is the ‘thought police’ out there looking to stop discussions and education - this thread isn’t offensive to anyone.

Titles of threads which are sensationalist do work to frighten people.

If all you wanted was a bit of discussion, knowing it’s a sensitive subject and people are worried already, and were aware your thread title could make people anxious, then you would choose different wording for the title.

But then, here we are, engaging with you.

I'm really pleased you feel more reassured now @GoneCrazy. If you'd like links to any of the research or other information mentioned in my post, please let me know.
(Maybe asking mumsnet for a title change isn't such an awful idea?)

@GoneCrazy nobody here is prohibiting free speech. Don’t be silly. All we are saying is that your thread title is spreading unnecessary fear because it is not based on fact. And given this is a humungously important topic - for peoples health - physical and mental and for peoples livelihoods - then yes people here have every right to try and stop this stupid misinformation.

If it were about something that doesn’t really matter in the grand scheme of things then fine. But the worldwide vaccination programme does matter. It matters enormously. And anybody trying to scare or disencourage people to receive vaccines that will get us all out of this mess need calling out.

You cannot hide behind ‘oh it’s only free speech’.

Indeed maybe a thread title change is for the best OP. But that’s up to you.

@GoneCrazy and yes this thread offends me for one which is why I have reported it. In fact it makes me downright mad.

"Did we vaccinate our vulnerable with the wrong vaccine?"

Judging from the results from Scotland and early indications from England, the answer seems to be a resounding NO

Both Pfizer and AZ seem to be the 'right' vaccines for our vulnerable. And everyone else.

'Least effective'
'Most used on our most vulnerable'

Lots of claims made by OP ....these threads should come with a health warning...contains much speculation ...

[quote Blessex]@GoneCrazy and yes this thread offends me for one which is why I have reported it. In fact it makes me downright mad.[/quote]
Indeed...

Totally wrong.

[quote Blessex]@GoneCrazy but you were the one who started this thread with a title that is click bait fodder.[/quote]
Indeed

Free speech is not spreading made up rubbish as facts in order to worry people. Some people are already extremely anxious why add to that....

[quote Blessex]@mrex thank you. I have reported this thread already. It is breathtaking indeed.

It's as breathtakingly entitled to bitch about the brand as it is arrogant to believe you know more about efficacy than the epidemiologists and virologists working on vaccine approval.

and it's on everyone not to fuck it up by irresponsible posts suggesting vaccines don't have the effectiveness that's already been proven.

Really the scientific community needs to now fight back at this armchair speculation which is all very well if it is not incorrect, sensationalist, rich world entitled and cost lives. I have had enough of ‘polite debate’ if it is based on bullshit.[/quote]
Totally agree....

These armchair MN's starting threads like this should be stopped.....

What purpose does spreading misinformation achieve?

Nearly everyone I know has had Pfizer actually. Our gp, my parents gp, the go near work and my DD's gp all are Pfizer centres aka they have minus 80 freezers. All big health centres admittedly. Plus latest data implied that AZ might actually be better

www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/pfizer-vaccine-vs-oxford-astrazeneca-moderna-covid-jabs-difference-compared/

The media are allowed then... but we are not allowed to discuss it?

Again. Nobody is saying it shouldn’t be discussed. But it should be discussed with the correct facts and data and without sensationalist headlines and soundbites which scare people. I don’t see any of that in the telegraph article you have shared.

Yes, OP you could request to change the title of your thread. It could be phrased in a way to encourage discussion rather than scaremongering. Can you see what the difference is and how the wording of titles is really important and not neutral? I’m sure you can.

I thought this article was more positive as it proposes producing vaccines against the N protein in addition to the spike protein as it has a lower mutation rate than the spike protein.

www.google.com/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/covid-vaccines-focus-on-the-spike-protein-but-heres-another-target-150315

Hi all, we've had a report from the OP asking if we can edit the title of this thread. It's possibly a little late in the day as most of the responses relate to the original title, but we're changing it now so the discussion can continue.

Just for the record, the original title was 'Did we vaccinate our vulnerable with the wrong vaccine?'

Good call on having the change made OP, well done.

Here is a link to the Public Health Scotland lovely research about fewer hospitalisations post vaccine (85% down for Pfizer, 94% for Oxford AZ);
Summary: www.publichealthscotland.scot/news/2021/february/vaccine-linked-to-reduction-in-risk-of-covid-19-admissions-to-hospitals/
Paper: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3789264.

Thanks v much for getting the tile changed Op. Appreciated.

Thanks for changing the title OP