The vaccines | vaxxed boosted unvaxxed? New poll

[Dumbstar]

Got mine yesterday evening. Didn't feel anything overnight or this morning so felt like a real man! Now I'm shivering cold for no reason, my muscles are aching, the injection site arm has become annoyingly sore and my head is feeling heavy with some pain too. Popped a paracetamol like a good little mummy's boy.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Apparently efficacy and not safety related. 79% with 4 week dosing is significantly higher than that dosing pattern done elsewhere isn’t it? Seems they may have been telling porkies on their press release! It’s clearly a very good vaccine that they keep monumentally screwing the trials up for

I’m hoping this is a misleading press release, rather than a fundamental problem with the trial. They really don’t help themselves, though. The AZ reputation is being hammered over the last few months.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[golden_blunder]

You’re dead right. These hypothetical passports are giving me loads of opportunities to be an argumentative twat but they’ll never amount to more than that. The EU have already come out and said they don’t want to give any more rights to the vaccinated than they will give to those with a recent negative test. No doubt the exact same fudge will happen in the UK and the US, for the reasons you mention. I find the strength of feeling about wanting to unnecessarily delay other people getting their lives back to normal utterly bizarre but nowt so queer as folk and the governments will be well aware of that.

Dunno if it’s gonna go away. Look at the pop up of Verifly in the US. It could quite easily be rolled out to other things too

 

[Mickeza]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

I’m a bit confused - didn’t Pfizer/Moderna release press releases stating interim data results from a specified cut off date before fully submitting the full data later? Or is it because they’ve done it even with the full data now available they’re slapping them on the wrist?

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I’m a bit confused - didn’t Pfizer/Moderna release press releases stating interim data results from a specified cut off date before fully submitting the full data later? Or is it because they’ve done it even with the full data now available they’re slapping them on the wrist?

I presume the latter.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Traub]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Can someone explain this to me in layman terms? Does the J&J work against the SA variant?

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Can someone explain this to me in layman terms? Does the J&J work against the SA variant?

Yes. It seems to. Although takes a month or so to give you any protection.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Good Twitter thread on latest AZ drama.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Suedesi]

The obvious answer is take the one you’re offered!

It’s really impossible to know which one is “best” as cross trial comparisons are so unreliable. If I had to choose, I’d probably go with Pfizer, as I’d get my second dose quickly and the data coming out of Israel shows really solid evidence of real life efficacy (because you can never be absolutely certain trial results will be replicated in real life) AZ would be my second choice, for the same reason.

Thank you

 

[mav_9me]

You are convinced there will be much less transmission in vaccinated people after say 5-8 months than people who have tested negative in the past day, in a World where transmission will inevitably be less anyway due to vaccines?

Yeah I’m calling bollocks on that. I am answering the specific question that I bolded.

To prevent mass discrimination, not least for people in poorer countries and those unable to vaccine due to health reasons, a passport and/or negative test has to be the solution or countries are just playing silly beggers all over again.

I am not making that comparison.

I am talking more generally. That data will show vaccinated people will not be infectious. That's the path to us (mankind) returning to previous ways, once everyone is vaccinated (all over the world, or in your specific region with only vaccinated people allowed to come in)

 

[0le]

The obvious answer is take the one you’re offered!

It’s really impossible to know which one is “best” as cross trial comparisons are so unreliable. If I had to choose, I’d probably go with Pfizer, as I’d get my second dose quickly and the data coming out of Israel shows really solid evidence of real life efficacy (because you can never be absolutely certain trial results will be replicated in real life) AZ would be my second choice, for the same reason.

Probably mentioned already but an article also discusses some other issues about deciding "which is best":
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00409-0

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

What really blows my mind is that the more recent results, the ones they should have released, were still good!

 

[massi83]

It is pretty amazing how poorly run company AZ is.

 

[ha_rooney]

Is it still 100% effective against hospitalisations/severe disease or was that also an exaggeration?

 

[Sir Matt]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

What really blows my mind is that the more recent results, the ones they should have released, were still good!

The people running the American trials and approval process for AZ are clowns, and, if there weren't an ongoing pandemic related to the vaccine, their application should be rejected on that basis alone.

In the US, everything has been delayed by their incompetence so we've been sitting on millions of doses of the AZ vaccine waiting for them to complete their trials and to apply for emergency use authorization. If they had completed their trials and application competently, those doses could've been used by now.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

The people running the American trials and approval process for AZ are clowns, and, if there weren't an ongoing pandemic related to the vaccine, their application should be rejected on that basis alone.

In the US, everything has been delayed by their incompetence so we've been sitting on millions of doses of the AZ vaccine waiting for them to complete their trials and to apply for emergency use authorization. If they had completed their trials and application competently, those doses could've been used by now.

To be fair, they can’t hurry the finish of a trial. Once the FDA asked them for more data they were stuck waiting for a certain number of events before they could analyse the data.

I’ve heard some people suggest that Oxford was the problem. They did all the early work in their first phase 3’s which turned out to be a shambles (not enough elderly, inconsistent dose, inconsistent dose interval) but AZ were involved by the time these US studies were set up, which have been much better designed and run.

Where AZ have shat the bed is with their communications. Press releases full of misleading claims, poorly explained and communicated supply issues etc

Anyway, I’m still convinced it’s a good vaccine. With solid evidence that it’s doing what it’s supposed to do in real life clinical practice. But yeah, hard not to wonder how this all worked out in a parallel universe where Hancock didn’t block the Merck partnership. Merck have loads of experience developing vaccines. AZ have none and it shows.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Is it still 100% effective against hospitalisations/severe disease or was that also an exaggeration?

It was an exaggeration. At the very least it needs a caveat. There wasn’t enough numbers to make that claim.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

The vaccination numbers in the US are quite staggering; 2.9M people got the jab on Saturday. 2.4M on Sunday.
60M doses given out in total so far.

It’s a huge country (c330m) but still those numbers are a big improvement on the <1m daily numbers from early/mid January.

% wise it’s working that approx 18% have had at least one jab.

Meanwhile 6% of Canadians have been vaccinated.

Our little tinpot dictator twat in Ottawa doesn't want to let go of his new power.

 

[Sir Matt]

To be fair, they can’t hurry the finish of a trial. Once the FDA asked them for more data they were stuck waiting for a certain number of events before they could analyse the data.

I’ve heard some people suggest that Oxford was the problem. They did all the early work in their first phase 3’s which turned out to be a shambles (not enough elderly, inconsistent dose, inconsistent dose interval) but AZ were involved by the time these US studies were set up, which have been much better designed and run.

Where AZ have shat the bed is with their communications. Press releases full of misleading claims, poorly explained and communicated supply issues etc

Anyway, I’m still convinced it’s a good vaccine. With solid evidence that it’s doing what it’s supposed to do in real life clinical practice. But yeah, hard not to wonder how this all worked out in a parallel universe where Hancock didn’t block the Merck partnership. Merck have loads of experience developing vaccines. AZ have none and it shows.

I didn't mean that they should rush the trial. It was delayed for almost 7 weeks because they dragged their feet providing evidence that two patients didn't suffer neurological side effects from the vaccine. Maybe there's some good justification for that, but it seems like administratively they bungled it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/11/us/politics/coronavirus-astrazeneca-united-states.html

 

[mav_9me]

Is it still 100% effective against hospitalisations/severe disease or was that also an exaggeration?

It was an exaggeration. At the very least it needs a caveat. There wasn’t enough numbers to make that claim.

Based off available data from trials it's 100% effective against hospitalisations/severe disease.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[lynchie]

To be fair, they can’t hurry the finish of a trial. Once the FDA asked them for more data they were stuck waiting for a certain number of events before they could analyse the data.

I’ve heard some people suggest that Oxford was the problem. They did all the early work in their first phase 3’s which turned out to be a shambles (not enough elderly, inconsistent dose, inconsistent dose interval) but AZ were involved by the time these US studies were set up, which have been much better designed and run.

Where AZ have shat the bed is with their communications. Press releases full of misleading claims, poorly explained and communicated supply issues etc

Anyway, I’m still convinced it’s a good vaccine. With solid evidence that it’s doing what it’s supposed to do in real life clinical practice. But yeah, hard not to wonder how this all worked out in a parallel universe where Hancock didn’t block the Merck partnership. Merck have loads of experience developing vaccines. AZ have none and it shows.

I think the combination of Oxford having no experience of running trials and AZ having no experience with vaccines is the root of basically all the problems.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Based off available data from trials it's 100% effective against hospitalisations/severe disease.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

It’s not powered to show that. None of those studies are. The 100% efficacy isn’t statistically significant. So we can’t rule out the possibility that it’s pure chance that the (small number of) hospitalised cases were all in the placebo arm.

Obviously the trends are encouraging and we might reach statistical significance eventually, by the time the studies are closed out. And it certainly doesn’t mean that they definitely aren’t 100% effective. They may well be. But, as it stands, those 100% efficacy claims need to be taken with a pinch of salt.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I think the combination of Oxford having no experience of running trials and AZ having no experience with vaccines is the root of basically all the problems.

Sounds about right.

 

[golden_blunder]

Joint football team? Nah

 

[mav_9me]

It’s not powered to show that. None of those studies are. The 100% efficacy isn’t statistically significant. So we can’t rule out the possibility that it’s pure chance that the (small number of) hospitalised cases were all in the placebo arm.

Obviously the trends are encouraging and we might reach statistical significance eventually, by the time the studies are closed out. And it certainly doesn’t mean that they definitely aren’t 100% effective. They may well be. But, as it stands, those 100% efficacy claims need to be taken with a pinch of salt.

Huh? What statistical significance? 100% effective against hospitalization and death is a fact. That's not a comparison. In the people who got the vaccine, 0 hospitalizations or deaths happened. That's a fact. That's not a comparison that requires statistical significance to be valid.

Now you could argue the generalizability to real world and that needs to be determined with regards to AZN (correct me if I'm wrong) but real world experience with Pfizer in Israel has been awesome.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Huh? What statistical significance? 100% effective against hospitalization and death is a fact. That's not a comparison. In the people who got the vaccine, 0 hospitalizations or deaths happened. That's a fact. That's not a comparison that requires statistical significance to be valid.

Now you could argue the generalizability to real world and that needs to be determined with regards to AZN (correct me if I'm wrong) but real world experience with Pfizer in Israel has been awesome.

Every comparison requires statistical significance. Otherwise you can’t rule out that the findings are down to chance. Toss a coin three times and get three heads. It’s a fact that the coin has landed on heads 100% of the the throws so far. But you can’t claim it will have 100% chance of landing on heads every time you throw it. That’s why statistical significance matters.

These studies were all powered to demonstrate efficacy in terms of preventing covid. As soon as they had enough cases to reach statistical significance for that endpoint they were analysed and submitted to the regulators. But they didn’t have a high enough number of severe cases to make statistically significant claims about hospitalisations/deaths etc as the numbers were too low.

As I said, the trends are all in the right directions so it’s all encouraging stuff. Plus the real life evidence in Israel (and in the UK) look great. I just take issue with claiming 100% efficacy in an endpoint that didn’t reach statistical significance.

 

[OleBoiii]

In case it wasn't posted. This is brilliant information for laymen like me

 

[Dumbstar]

Got mine yesterday evening. Didn't feel anything overnight or this morning so felt like a real man! Now I'm shivering cold for no reason, my muscles are aching, the injection site arm has become annoyingly sore and my head is feeling heavy with some pain too. Popped a paracetamol like a good little mummy's boy.

Paracetamol lasted 4 hours then back to shivering and heavy head with body aches. Took another paracetamol. This time symptoms settled but still got heavy eyes and fatigue. Hopefully won't need another paracetamol and sleep will fix the rest.

 

[Port Vale Devil]

In case it wasn't posted. This is brilliant information for laymen like me

Watched that the other day and it was very well explained.

 

[langster]

So I got mine on Monday as planned, the whole system at Torquay's English Riviera Centre was amazingly well run with so many volunteers who seemed genuinely happy to be working.

I felt fine Monday and woke up yesterday feeling just a bit groggy. Felt fine most of the day although I rested and did as little as possible. My arm became quite sore by mid afternoon, a very dull throb like someone had been repeatedly punching it for an hour, but other than that I just felt tired.

 

[0le]

Every comparison requires statistical significance. Otherwise you can’t rule out that the findings are down to chance. Toss a coin three times and get three heads. It’s a fact that the coin has landed on heads 100% of the the throws so far. But you can’t claim it will have 100% chance of landing on heads every time you throw it. That’s why statistical significance matters.

These studies were all powered to demonstrate efficacy in terms of preventing covid. As soon as they had enough cases to reach statistical significance for that endpoint they were analysed and submitted to the regulators. But they didn’t have a high enough number of severe cases to make statistically significant claims about hospitalisations/deaths etc as the numbers were too low.

As I said, the trends are all in the right directions so it’s all encouraging stuff. Plus the real life evidence in Israel (and in the UK) look great. I just take issue with claiming 100% efficacy in an endpoint that didn’t reach statistical significance.

Just to be clear though, a test for statistical significance alone does not rule out anything by chance. A statistically significant result gives evidence of an effect. One may use the significance test to decide whether a data set merits further investigation.

 

[Robbo's Shoulder]

Had the Astrazeneca jab on Sunday, was fine Sunday night Monday morning then extreme fatigue set in. Had a bad night with shivers and a banging headache. Those symptoms went away Tuesday except for the fatigue. Just up after 10 solid hours sleep and feel great. Have had no arm pain at all, nothing except a wee bit of itching Sunday night. I did have the virus last year so was expecting the reaction tbh.

 

[Penna]

Paracetamol lasted 4 hours then back to shivering and heavy head with body aches. Took another paracetamol. This time symptoms settled but still got heavy eyes and fatigue. Hopefully won't need another paracetamol and sleep will fix the rest.

You need to take 2 paracetamol tablets as an adult, if they're 500mg ones. You can take up to eight in any 24-hour period.

 

[Snowjoe]

Crazy, got the text this morning and booked for 9:30 this morning, wild

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Just to be clear though, a test for statistical significance alone does not rule out anything by chance. A statistically significant result gives evidence of an effect. One may use the significance test to decide whether a data set merits further investigation.

My grasp of stats is pretty limited and restricted to the medical context only where a p value of < 0.05 is deemed statistically significant (95% CI excludes no effect) I’m sure there’s a lot more to it than this though!

 

[Snowjoe]

Jesus that was the most incredible experience, got a text at 07:30 inviting me to come in, booked an appointment for 09:30, arrived at 09:15 and was jabbed by 09:17

 

[Solius]

Jesus that was the most incredible experience, got a text at 07:30 inviting me to come in, booked an appointment for 09:30, arrived at 09:15 and was jabbed by 09:17

Nice!