I think it's been mostly Pfizer so far. It's one of the reasons why things like coverage of smaller nursing homes and elderly housebound people had been slow in some areas. The Pfizer logistics just didn't fit that kind of door to door service.Any breakdown on how many of those were Pfizer/Moderna an how many were AZ?
This is very true. AZ is sometimes talked about as some shambled together bodge of a vaccine, partly because their reporting has been pretty shambolic at times, but also because of that 65%(ish) effectiveness number looks pretty poor compared to Pfizer/Moderna. But no one in the vaccine arm needed hospitalisation, and if that holds when it gets rolled out, that's a huge success, even if a minority do get mild symptoms.An interesting report from the NYTimes basically arguing that public discussion of the various vaccine trials has been unnecessarily negative. In particular that the lower efficacy numbers (on the AZ and around mutations in particular) are misleading people into thinking they aren't as important/useful as they really are.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/01/briefing/vaccination-myanmar-coup-rochester-police.html
Here’s the key fact: All five vaccines with public results have eliminated Covid-19 deaths. They have also drastically reduced hospitalizations. “They’re all good trial results,” Caitlin Rivers, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University, told me. “It’s great news.”
Which if it proves to be even close to true in real life, will be a huge deal. Around 75,000 people were vaccinated in those trials.
It’s interesting that J&J have a different end-point to everyone else. I’d love to know why. Usually the primary end-point is discussed/agreed with the regulators so it’s a little odd that symptomatic covid has been used as the primary end-point for all bar one vaccine thus far.This is very true. AZ is sometimes talked about as some shambled together bodge of a vaccine, partly because their reporting has been pretty shambolic at times, but also because of that 65%(ish) effectiveness number looks pretty poor compared to Pfizer/Moderna. But no one in the vaccine arm needed hospitalisation, and if that holds when it gets rolled out, that's a huge success, even if a minority do get mild symptoms.
J&J seem to have gone a bit further with that. Their effectiveness number specifically excludes mild cases, and they've been heavily talking up that it reduces severe cases and hospitalisation. And I think that's fair enough. Even allowing for us being unsure about long-term impacts of those mild cases, keeping people out of hospital should be the main goal.
Of the roughly 75,000 people who have receivedone of the five in a research trial, not a single person has died from Covid, and only a few people appear to have been hospitalized. None have remained hospitalized 28 days after receiving a shot.
To put that in perspective, it helps to think about what Covid has done so far to a representative group of 75,000 American adults: It has killed roughly 150 of them and sent several hundred more to the hospital. The vaccines reduce those numbers to zero and nearly zero, based on the research trials.
Zero isn’t even the most relevant benchmark. A typical U.S. flu season kills between five and 15 out of every 75,000 adults and hospitalizes more than 100 of them.
I don't doubt the gist of that, and agree it's extremely good news, but I can't help thinking that the 75,000 trial volunteers will mostly be people who follow distancing and hygiene rules closely, whereas of the 75,000 representative Americans at least half will be deluded loons.This bit of the article that @jojojo linked makes delightful reading.
Yeah that’s a very good point. Plus the trial is unlikely to recruit the very old or very unwell, who will disproportionately feature in those dead/hospitalised stats.I don't doubt the gist of that, and agree it's extremely good news, but I can't help thinking that the 75,000 trial volunteers will mostly be people who follow distancing and hygiene rules closely, whereas of the 75,000 representative Americans at least half will be deluded loons.
It's true that they aren't quite a cross-section of the population. Their own placebo groups over the efficacy trial reporting period have somewhere between 6 and 10 deaths in total and around 100 hospitalisations. Those numbers are harder to confirm though as hospitalisation criteria (and even the definition of a hospital) will vary between countries.I don't doubt the gist of that, and agree it's extremely good news, but I can't help thinking that the 75,000 trial volunteers will mostly be people who follow distancing and hygiene rules closely, whereas of the 75,000 representative Americans at least half will be deluded loons.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Somewhat unrelated but isn’t it people who have had COVID and then a vaccine that have felt the worst side effects?Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Small study but interesting findings. Prior infection plus single vaccine jab gives Ab titres > two jabs. Might be an easy way to make finite vaccine supplies go a lot further. Especially in countries with very high caseload to begin with (e.g. Uk)
According to Maccabi, only 31 people out of 163,000 fully vaccinated customers became infected 7-16 days following their second shot. A control group of similar ages had over 6,500 infections in the same period. The two groups are not perfectly comparable – those who get vaccinated may be more concerned about COVID-19 and likely to take other precautions, for example. Nevertheless, it takes a lot to explain away a 200-fold difference in infection rates. Maccabi told the Times of Israel the vaccine was 92 percent effective, only slightly below the 95 percent reported in clinical trials. That's particularly impressive since the Maccabi sample was much older on average than Pfizer's test population.
The health ministry's sample is larger, and the results almost as good. Within a week of their second vaccination, 317 people out of 715,425 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, a rate of 0.04 percent. It's harder for clinical trials to measure rare events like hospitalizations and deaths than infections, so it's particularly important that Israel reported just 16 hospital cases among the vaccinated, or 0.002 percent.
However, the Israeli data is less positive for the benefits of a single Pfizer/BioNtech dose, possibly explaining why Israel's national infection rate kept climbing even after a larger proportion received their first round. At the time of writing, there are 404 critically ill patients in Israeli hospitals who got their first vaccine dose prior to testing positive. This potentially conflicts with the clinical trial data, which showed infection rates flatlining even before the second round was administered.
Probably not unrelated. It may be that it's telling us that prior infection is like having the first dose. In the mRNA trials a lot of the strongest side-effects have been on dose 2.Somewhat unrelated but isn’t it people who have had COVID and then a vaccine that have felt the worst side effects?
I was just reading that. Really reassuring news.Some more good news coming out of Israel with regards to a 2-dose en-masse Pfizer vaccination in terms of efficacy in preventing transmission and severe covid. Israel has vaccinated about 20% of its population
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55706855
https://www.iflscience.com/health-a...KyQ5-7pg1uR2U3w2wxVSH9LYC9cFp_rIJ3euI4IYLM0pY
Some more good news coming out of Israel with regards to a 2-dose en-masse Pfizer vaccination in terms of efficacy in preventing transmission and severe covid. Israel has vaccinated about 20% of its population
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55706855
https://www.iflscience.com/health-a...KyQ5-7pg1uR2U3w2wxVSH9LYC9cFp_rIJ3euI4IYLM0pY
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I won't relax until as close to 100% of people are vaccinated as possible. And even then it will take years to get the whole world immunised.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
More Israeli data. Over 60s who have been vaccinated showing significant reduction in cases/hospitalisations etc
The tweet is framed as nothing but good news but the 40-60 yo graph is less reassuring. That’s a big worry for me. Once the elderly are vaccinated is there a risk we let our guard down and kick off a surge of middle aged hospitalisation/deaths. I know that once my mum and dad are vaccinated I will feel like the pandemic threat is basically over. Would suck to end up in ITU a few weeks later.
Very true, I think ideally it'll be offset by more vaccines coming to market and logistics in place to get that age group vaccinated (although I'm not sure the urgency will be the same) but demand will be there.The tweet is framed as nothing but good news but the 40-60 yo graph is less reassuring. That’s a big worry for me. Once the elderly are vaccinated is there a risk we let our guard down and kick off a surge of middle aged hospitalisation/deaths. I know that once my mum and dad are vaccinated I will feel like the pandemic threat is basically over. Would suck to end up in ITU a few weeks later.
The variants are really making me nervous. The next couple of months we’ll have millions of people partially protected by a single dose while there is ongoing rampant community spread, including variants which have already evolved to partially evade the existing immune response. That’s a slightly terrifying scenario. I think I’m going to stick my fingers in my ears and try not to think about it. We’ll probably be fine. HopefullyVery true, I think ideally it'll be offset by more vaccines coming to market and logistics in place to get that age group vaccinated (although I'm not sure the urgency will be the same) but demand will be there.
In addition with community spread and R number lessening enough to withstand behaviour changes with relaxation of rules through a combination of some social rules prohibiting too much mixing too quickly and decreased transmissibility (both from those who've had one vaccine, those who have had covid recently, those who had covid but a one dose vaccine).
I suppose the questions then with regards to morals of the lockdown in terms of societal impact comes into play with the elderly, vulnerable protected. Risk also with propagation of the variants too and how much that will lessen the aggregate benefit of vaccines.
But I mean we were looking for proof of conception for vaccines lessing transmission and more and more data coming in to suggest that effect is a plus overall - for vaccine confidence and eventual uptake by general population.
Weirdly I do wonder how different I'll be socially once I've had my second Pfizer dose in March.
Excellent news!!Over 65’s to be invited for vaccination from next week - Daily Telegraph.
Won't everybody's bodies be ready for covid and it's evolving variants? At least those that were vaccinated or gained some immunity by already being infected once? Surely that's a better place to be than a year ago when we were all ripe for the picking with zero immunity programming?The variants are really making me nervous. The next couple of months we’ll have millions of people partially protected by a single dose while there is ongoing rampant community spread, including variants which have already evolved to partially evade the existing immune response. That’s a slightly terrifying scenario. I think I’m going to stick my fingers in my ears and try not to think about it. We’ll probably be fine. Hopefully
So far it looks as though the variants are at least partially vulnerable to immunity from prior infection or vaccination.Won't everybody's bodies be ready for covid and it's evolving variants? At least those that were vaccinated or gained some immunity by already being infected once? Surely that's a better place to be than a year ago when we were all ripe for the picking with zero immunity programming?
Agreed, I fully share the fears of worst case scenarios, sadly. But the hope has to come from SARS1, the common cold, etc, which have all mutated into less serious coronavirus variants. To kill more people in different variants is an evolutionary suicide mission. The hope again.So far it looks as though the variants are at least partially vulnerable to immunity from prior infection or vaccination.
The nightmare scenario is some sort of extreme escape mutation where having caught covid before or received one of the vaccines gives you no protection at all. Then the virus can spread just as quickly as it did in the very first wave. Nobody will have any protection at all. It’s also possible that this could happen with a variant that is simultaneously more lethal.
Everything that I’ve read about coronaviruses tells me that this is extremely unlikely. They tend to be stable and don’t mutate rapidly or dramatically. Immunity isn’t necessarily very long lasting but second and subsequent infections tend to be less severe. It’s just that all these recent variants have freaked me out a bit so so it’s hard not to obsess about worst case scenarios.
Very true. The press has been too busy promoting the limitations found in the trials, without mentioning the positives. First we see people extensively question vaccines' effectiveness against new strains, then the side effects (which are ordinary), and now the efficacy. All these do no good to the society but mislead people not to take vaccines.An interesting report from the NYTimes basically arguing that public discussion of the various vaccine trials has been unnecessarily negative. In particular that the lower efficacy numbers (on the AZ and around mutations in particular) are misleading people into thinking they aren't as important/useful as they really are.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/01/briefing/vaccination-myanmar-coup-rochester-police.html
Here’s the key fact: All five vaccines with public results have eliminated Covid-19 deaths. They have also drastically reduced hospitalizations. “They’re all good trial results,” Caitlin Rivers, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University, told me. “It’s great news.”
Which if it proves to be even close to true in real life, will be a huge deal. Around 75,000 people were vaccinated in those trials.
Any reports of similar happening in the UK? That’s a lot of people turning down the vaccine!New data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirms what anecdotal reports from nursing home administrators around the country have been suggesting for weeks: that a significant number of their workers are refusing the Covid-19 vaccine, at least when they are initially offered it.
The C.D.C. reported Monday that among 11,460 nursing homes where pharmacists from CVS and Walgreens held vaccination clinics between mid-December and mid-January, 78 percent of residents got immunized on average, but only 37.5 percent of staff members did.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/feb/01/half-of-care-home-staff-at-uks-largest-providerAny reports of similar happening in the UK? That’s a lot of people turning down the vaccine!
FFS. You’d theoretically expect someone who works there to be more amenable too.Any reports of similar happening in the UK? That’s a lot of people turning down the vaccine!
My first reaction is that it very much should. But if that were the case then how about the likes of teachers, don't they have a duty of care to avoid infecting the children they teach and their families?It’s an interesting one. I’m sure one of our resident clinicians (@africanspur @Wolverine ) can correct me if my experiences is out of date but hep B vaccination used to be a requirement to work in hospitals. If your titre is down, get a booster. Non-negotiable. You wonder if this vaccine should also be a condition of employment?
Yeah, it’s hard to know where to draw the line. Waiters in restaurants, taxi drivers etc etcMy first reaction is that it very much should. But if that were the case then how about the likes of teachers, don't they have a duty of care to avoid infecting the children they teach and their families?
Yep it is and in fact, it, as well as evidence of other vaccines, is compulsory to even enter medical school. At least for doctors, I'm not sure about nurses/HCAs/physio etcIt’s an interesting one. I’m sure one of our resident clinicians (@africanspur @Wolverine ) can correct me if my experiences is out of date but hep B vaccination used to be a requirement to work in hospitals. If your titre is down, get a booster. Non-negotiable. You wonder if this vaccine should also be a condition of employment?
It's great news. Again, as with other partial publications the devil may be in the details. But the concept of switching adenovirus between the two doses was always interesting. It's part of a trial with AZ I believe (for a dose of each approach) but I don't know what the status of that is, or whether it might be an option in some rollout programs in Q2.Umm... does this mean a lot of us need to eat some humble pie? Sputnik seems to be extremely effective.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00191-4/fulltext
Pretty sure they said on Radio 4 earlier that this trial might start as soon as next week.It's part of a trial with AZ I believe (for a dose of each approach) but I don't know what the status of that is
Great news. Small numbers but seems to be highly statistically significant. I wonder what sort or manufacturing capacity they have?Umm... does this mean a lot of us need to eat some humble pie? Sputnik seems to be extremely effective.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00191-4/fulltext
I've got to say, I've just read and (more or less) understood the full report. It's a model of clarity, and left me with none of the "what are you trying to say,/hide, were your tests as confused as your writing?" reactions I had to the AZ paper.Umm... does this mean a lot of us need to eat some humble pie? Sputnik seems to be extremely effective.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00191-4/fulltext
Where did you find the full report? I read the Lancet opinion piece but couldn’t access the report it referenced.I've got to say, I've just read and (more or less) understood the full report. It's a model of clarity, and left me with none of the "what are you trying to say,/hide, were your tests as confused as your writing?" reactions I had to the AZ paper.
Just to state the obvious now. It's based on their Russian trials - so they don't have any mutation efficacy info to give us, but it is does cover the age groups nicely (though not ethnicities - but we should get more on that from their other trials). It's very open about possible serious adverse events (comparable numbers/types across vaccinated/placebo groups) and deaths (which included two covid deaths in the vaccinated arm - both of whom became symptomatic within a week of dose 1).
Very encouraging. Though doubtless someone will spot more flaws, and as always the feeling that we won't really "know" until we get mass data remains.
It's an interim report but it's got what looks like the most useful (to outsiders) data in it.Where did you find the full report? I read the Lancet opinion piece but couldn’t access the report it referenced.