descl wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

aerolimani wrote:

Fortunately, we have better, more accurate evidence emerging regarding rates of death and hospitalization, in countries where vaccination has been taking place for a while. Indications are that all the vaccines currently in worldwide use are successful in preventing serious illness and death.

I agree with Pfizer, Moderna, J&J, and AZ. When I look at Chile and the UAE, I question the effectiveness of a few vaccines (effecacy is trial data, effectiveness is real world performance).

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... on~CHL~ARE

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... RE~ISR~GBR

For the EU, UK, and FDA(US) vaccines, I completely agree with you. However, for the vaccines where they haven't put to public peer review the trials data, I do have questions.

I do not expect vaccines to be perfect.

At this point, quantity, not quality, is the main issue, but the UAE and Chile seem to not be as benefitting, or does the vaccine take longer?

Lightsaber

Preliminary results from a study made by the Catholic University of Chile concluded:
14 days after 1st dose, 38,2% of people vaccinated with Coronavac (Sinovac) produced neutralizing antibodies against S1 spike protein.
14 days after 2nd dose, % reached 96,9%.
This means, "full" protection is reached 6 weeks after 1st dose.
On the other hand, the Pfizer vaccine shows an 80% efficiency 14 days after the 1st dose, so yes, it looks like coronavac takes longer.

I attached a file that shows a sharp decline of % of people aged 70+ in UCIs in Chile in the last weeks; thats the people that got the vaccine first.

I think we are all quite nervous in Chile about this Sinovac vaccine because people were expecting better results sooner, instead, 90% of population is under a strict lockdown and borders closed effective tomorrow, but the are some encouraging figures.

Chile started its massive vaccination on february 3, by february 15th there was a significant % of people vaccinated with 1 dose, this means this first group reached a significant protection just last week.

Which links are you referring to? Please repost the links. I don't mind if it takes longer, but hopefully it is understandable I expected earlier changes.

Lightsaber

The point I am making is more to do with deaths and serious illness. That being the more important statistic (IMO) than efficacy of the vaccine. So, while new case statistics may not look good, it doesn’t mean the vaccines aren’t showing a benefit. To me it’s a better measure to look at numbers of deaths and hospitalizations.

Here’s a Sinovac study. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heal ... SKBN2A52Q6

So yes, less effective preventing cases, but still 100% effective preventing serious illness and death.

This is why I say the best vaccine is the one you’re offered. If you have the luxury of choice, that’s great. But if not, there’s no good reason not to take what you’re offered. And waiting for the vaccine of your choice, while it might be your right depending where you live, is still not the best choice for the benefit of all.

lightsaber wrote:

descl wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

I agree with Pfizer, Moderna, J&J, and AZ. When I look at Chile and the UAE, I question the effectiveness of a few vaccines (effecacy is trial data, effectiveness is real world performance).

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... on~CHL~ARE

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... RE~ISR~GBR

For the EU, UK, and FDA(US) vaccines, I completely agree with you. However, for the vaccines where they haven't put to public peer review the trials data, I do have questions.

I do not expect vaccines to be perfect.

At this point, quantity, not quality, is the main issue, but the UAE and Chile seem to not be as benefitting, or does the vaccine take longer?

Lightsaber

Preliminary results from a study made by the Catholic University of Chile concluded:
14 days after 1st dose, 38,2% of people vaccinated with Coronavac (Sinovac) produced neutralizing antibodies against S1 spike protein.
14 days after 2nd dose, % reached 96,9%.
This means, "full" protection is reached 6 weeks after 1st dose.
On the other hand, the Pfizer vaccine shows an 80% efficiency 14 days after the 1st dose, so yes, it looks like coronavac takes longer.

I attached a file that shows a sharp decline of % of people aged 70+ in UCIs in Chile in the last weeks; thats the people that got the vaccine first.

I think we are all quite nervous in Chile about this Sinovac vaccine because people were expecting better results sooner, instead, 90% of population is under a strict lockdown and borders closed effective tomorrow, but the are some encouraging figures.

Chile started its massive vaccination on february 3, by february 15th there was a significant % of people vaccinated with 1 dose, this means this first group reached a significant protection just last week.

Which links are you referring to? Please repost the links. I don't mind if it takes longer, but hopefully it is understandable I expected earlier changes.

Lightsaber

This is the link I was refering to https://www.instagram.com/p/CNP9z71JZk2 ... pejub2bokp
Let me know if you have access to the post.

aerolimani wrote:

The point I am making is more to do with deaths and serious illness. That being the more important statistic (IMO) than efficacy of the vaccine. So, while new case statistics may not look good, it doesn’t mean the vaccines aren’t showing a benefit. To me it’s a better measure to look at numbers of deaths and hospitalizations.

Here’s a Sinovac study. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heal ... SKBN2A52Q6

So yes, less effective preventing cases, but still 100% effective preventing serious illness and death.

This is why I say the best vaccine is the one you’re offered. If you have the luxury of choice, that’s great. But if not, there’s no good reason not to take what you’re offered. And waiting for the vaccine of your choice, while it might be your right depending where you live, is still not the best choice for the benefit of all.

I see your point. My metric is slowing transmission. I care mostly about the risk to my children, since they cannot yet be vaccinated. I am very happy at how well so many vaccines do in that regard.

I do agree don't be too picky. For example, we have discussed all the AZ doses the USA is sitting on. I would like those offered to any age group as that would help slow the bidding wave.

I will keep following Chile and the UAE as they are interesting case studies.

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

aerolimani wrote:

The point I am making is more to do with deaths and serious illness. That being the more important statistic (IMO) than efficacy of the vaccine. So, while new case statistics may not look good, it doesn’t mean the vaccines aren’t showing a benefit. To me it’s a better measure to look at numbers of deaths and hospitalizations.

Here’s a Sinovac study. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heal ... SKBN2A52Q6

So yes, less effective preventing cases, but still 100% effective preventing serious illness and death.

This is why I say the best vaccine is the one you’re offered. If you have the luxury of choice, that’s great. But if not, there’s no good reason not to take what you’re offered. And waiting for the vaccine of your choice, while it might be your right depending where you live, is still not the best choice for the benefit of all.

I see your point. My metric is slowing transmission. I care mostly about the risk to my children, since they cannot yet be vaccinated. I am very happy at how well so many vaccines do in that regard.

I do agree don't be too picky. For example, we have discussed all the AZ doses the USA is sitting on. I would like those offered to any age group as that would help slow the bidding wave.

I will keep following Chile and the UAE as they are interesting case studies.

Lightsaber

Indeed, there should not be any vaccine doses going unused anywhere. Also, I think there should be more acceptance, in the west, of non-western vaccines.

My attitude towards the pandemic is changing. I used to have hope that we could more or less eliminate the virus before the end of 2021. Unfortunately, the trajectory the virus is on now seems to be indicating that it will not go away so quickly. I think back to March 2020 and governments imposing lockdowns, saying “three weeks to flatten the curve.” How naive does that sound now?

Now, I think our goal must change to learning how to live with SARS-CoV-2. Just this morning, we’re hearing about another new resistant variant out of Japan. The evidence shows that community spread is already well underway in Tokyo. So, that’s now four contagious variants circulating, with resistance to vaccines, and affecting younger populations more seriously.

I’ve pretty much arrived at the point where I accept that I will likely contract the virus at some point. I just hope I have a vaccine-reinforced immune system before that happens. Unfortunately, I think that is where I think everyone’s mindset should be, if we are ever to get through this.

Pfizer jab 100% effective at preventing hospitalizations. Real world data also updated to show that the Pfizer jab is 100% effective against the B.1.351 variant (South Africa).
https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-relea ... no-serious

aerolimani wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

aerolimani wrote:

The point I am making is more to do with deaths and serious illness. That being the more important statistic (IMO) than efficacy of the vaccine. So, while new case statistics may not look good, it doesn’t mean the vaccines aren’t showing a benefit. To me it’s a better measure to look at numbers of deaths and hospitalizations.

Here’s a Sinovac study. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heal ... SKBN2A52Q6

So yes, less effective preventing cases, but still 100% effective preventing serious illness and death.

This is why I say the best vaccine is the one you’re offered. If you have the luxury of choice, that’s great. But if not, there’s no good reason not to take what you’re offered. And waiting for the vaccine of your choice, while it might be your right depending where you live, is still not the best choice for the benefit of all.

I see your point. My metric is slowing transmission. I care mostly about the risk to my children, since they cannot yet be vaccinated. I am very happy at how well so many vaccines do in that regard.

I do agree don't be too picky. For example, we have discussed all the AZ doses the USA is sitting on. I would like those offered to any age group as that would help slow the bidding wave.

I will keep following Chile and the UAE as they are interesting case studies.

Lightsaber

Indeed, there should not be any vaccine doses going unused anywhere. Also, I think there should be more acceptance, in the west, of non-western vaccines.

My attitude towards the pandemic is changing. I used to have hope that we could more or less eliminate the virus before the end of 2021. Unfortunately, the trajectory the virus is on now seems to be indicating that it will not go away so quickly. I think back to March 2020 and governments imposing lockdowns, saying “three weeks to flatten the curve.” How naive does that sound now?

Now, I think our goal must change to learning how to live with SARS-CoV-2. Just this morning, we’re hearing about another new resistant variant out of Japan. The evidence shows that community spread is already well underway in Tokyo. So, that’s now four contagious variants circulating, with resistance to vaccines, and affecting younger populations more seriously.

I’ve pretty much arrived at the point where I accept that I will likely contract the virus at some point. I just hope I have a vaccine-reinforced immune system before that happens. Unfortunately, I think that is where I think everyone’s mindset should be, if we are ever to get through this.

We agree on many things. So the following discussion fills in the differences.

Non western vaccines are far less public in the data. I have relatives who subscribe to the New England Journal of Medicine (both online and paper versions). In there I can look up studies on every western vaccine. The non-western vaccines are less forthright in information. e.g., we know AZ had no severe cases vs. B.1.351 (South Africa variant), but low protection (article wording is harsh, misses some decent trends in charts):
https://wordpress.cels.anl.gov/covid-va ... s-b-1-351/

Where is the data on Sinovac, Sinopharm, and Sputnik V in similar form in a peer reviewed journal?

Now Bharat Biotech might get out the data. It is the constant testing that leads confidence, not who made it.

https://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphi ... e-fda.html

e.g., I can find time to activation in the NEJM for Pfizer, Moderna, J&J, and AZ. I don't care which peer reviewed journal, but criticism of vaccines must be allowed to improve (although AZ keeps proving it gets better the longer in arm, per prior links I posted).

That is one reason I caution against delaying a vaccine. As your link on Sinovac, vaccines have very different time response curves.

It is knowing the resistance to P.1, B.1.351 and now India variants that need to be known.

That said, I agree on early vaccination.

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... HL~ARE~ISR

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations

It amazes me how well the UK and Israel are doing.
Better than my simulation I set up.

Lightsaber

Single dose nasal vaccine in testing is apparently effective against COVID-19, with trials still underway
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/c ... al-vaccine

KFTG wrote:

Single dose nasal vaccine in testing is apparently effective against COVID-19, with trials still underway
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/c ... al-vaccine

I could hold out for something like that for a booster. A vaccine that produces an immune response in the lungs and nasal cavity could really cut down on transmission.

lightsaber wrote:

aerolimani wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

I see your point. My metric is slowing transmission. I care mostly about the risk to my children, since they cannot yet be vaccinated. I am very happy at how well so many vaccines do in that regard.

I do agree don't be too picky. For example, we have discussed all the AZ doses the USA is sitting on. I would like those offered to any age group as that would help slow the bidding wave.

I will keep following Chile and the UAE as they are interesting case studies.

Lightsaber

Indeed, there should not be any vaccine doses going unused anywhere. Also, I think there should be more acceptance, in the west, of non-western vaccines.

My attitude towards the pandemic is changing. I used to have hope that we could more or less eliminate the virus before the end of 2021. Unfortunately, the trajectory the virus is on now seems to be indicating that it will not go away so quickly. I think back to March 2020 and governments imposing lockdowns, saying “three weeks to flatten the curve.” How naive does that sound now?

Now, I think our goal must change to learning how to live with SARS-CoV-2. Just this morning, we’re hearing about another new resistant variant out of Japan. The evidence shows that community spread is already well underway in Tokyo. So, that’s now four contagious variants circulating, with resistance to vaccines, and affecting younger populations more seriously.

I’ve pretty much arrived at the point where I accept that I will likely contract the virus at some point. I just hope I have a vaccine-reinforced immune system before that happens. Unfortunately, I think that is where I think everyone’s mindset should be, if we are ever to get through this.

We agree on many things. So the following discussion fills in the differences.

Non western vaccines are far less public in the data. I have relatives who subscribe to the New England Journal of Medicine (both online and paper versions). In there I can look up studies on every western vaccine. The non-western vaccines are less forthright in information. e.g., we know AZ had no severe cases vs. B.1.351 (South Africa variant), but low protection (article wording is harsh, misses some decent trends in charts):
https://wordpress.cels.anl.gov/covid-va ... s-b-1-351/

Where is the data on Sinovac, Sinopharm, and Sputnik V in similar form in a peer reviewed journal?

Now Bharat Biotech might get out the data. It is the constant testing that leads confidence, not who made it.

https://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphi ... e-fda.html

e.g., I can find time to activation in the NEJM for Pfizer, Moderna, J&J, and AZ. I don't care which peer reviewed journal, but criticism of vaccines must be allowed to improve (although AZ keeps proving it gets better the longer in arm, per prior links I posted).

That is one reason I caution against delaying a vaccine. As your link on Sinovac, vaccines have very different time response curves.

It is knowing the resistance to P.1, B.1.351 and now India variants that need to be known.

That said, I agree on early vaccination.

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... HL~ARE~ISR

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations

It amazes me how well the UK and Israel are doing.
Better than my simulation I set up.

Lightsaber

Indeed, we do largely agree. My opinions are coloured by the fact I spend most of my time living outside the “first world.” There’s not been a lot of help forthcoming, bringing the western vaccines outside of the first world. In my opinion, the right approach would be to distribute all the vaccines more broadly, internationally, with a focus on the Pfizer and Moderna types for essential workers and elderly populations, and the other types for younger populations.

I understand the top-down age approach being taken around the world, but I think it’s unnecessarily delaying the vaccination of the bulk of the working population. It’s taking too long to get to the 40-65 year olds.

I do feel that better studies ought to be happening for the non-western vaccines. However, I feel like the western world could be a lot more forthcoming, expressing interest in these vaccines, and encouraging the undertaking of more peer-reviewed studies. But, nationalism, and probably a degree of bigotry, is interfering.

There are Lancet articles about the phase 3 studies of both Sinovac and Sputnik V.

flyingclrs727 wrote:

KFTG wrote:

Single dose nasal vaccine in testing is apparently effective against COVID-19, with trials still underway
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/c ... al-vaccine

I could hold out for something like that for a booster. A vaccine that produces an immune response in the lungs and nasal cavity could really cut down on transmission.

The current ones do, but one with no needle is also better for hesitancy, for reducing medical waste, and for safety reasons. It amazes me that in 2021 when we can directly introduce mRNA into living cells in living people and deftly alter the genetic architecture of a virus so as to make it do our bidding, we are still giving vaccines with a Victorian-era invention, the hypodermic needle.

aerolimani wrote:

Indeed, there should not be any vaccine doses going unused anywhere. Also, I think there should be more acceptance, in the west, of non-western vaccines.

I think you are mixing hoarding with wastage. Hoarding should be avoided, and it will be because these vaccines have short life span.

Wastage is mainly because of logistics involved Ultra Deep Freezer(in the past) - Freezer - Refrigerator - Thaw - Multi dose vile - jab. This issue not west specific.

Combine that with completely chaotic decentralized registration process will lead to wastage.

I know people who registered with CVS, RiteAid, Meijer, County, Beaumont Healthcare system, City of Detroit and walk-ins. If one person registers at six different places, how are they going to plan.

DocLightning wrote:

flyingclrs727 wrote:

KFTG wrote:

Single dose nasal vaccine in testing is apparently effective against COVID-19, with trials still underway
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/c ... al-vaccine

I could hold out for something like that for a booster. A vaccine that produces an immune response in the lungs and nasal cavity could really cut down on transmission.

The current ones do, but one with no needle is also better for hesitancy, for reducing medical waste, and for safety reasons. It amazes me that in 2021 when we can directly introduce mRNA into living cells in living people and deftly alter the genetic architecture of a virus so as to make it do our bidding, we are still giving vaccines with a Victorian-era invention, the hypodermic needle.

It certainly would be less traumatic for children. My wife and I took out son in for his 1 year shots last month the day after his birthday. He got 4 shots, one in each limb. My wife was upset that he had so many at once. I figured it was easier to get over them all at once.

dtw2hyd wrote:

aerolimani wrote:

Indeed, there should not be any vaccine doses going unused anywhere. Also, I think there should be more acceptance, in the west, of non-western vaccines.

I think you are mixing hoarding with wastage. Hoarding should be avoided, and it will be because these vaccines have short life span.

Wastage is mainly because of logistics involved Ultra Deep Freezer(in the past) - Freezer - Refrigerator - Thaw - Multi dose vile - jab. This issue not west specific.

Combine that with completely chaotic decentralized registration process will lead to wastage.

I know people who registered with CVS, RiteAid, Meijer, County, Beaumont Healthcare system, City of Detroit and walk-ins. If one person registers at six different places, how are they going to plan.

I was responding to Lightsaber's mention of AZ. I believe they are referring to how the USA is sitting on tens of millions of doses of the AZ vaccine which they purchased, but aren't using yet because the FDA has not yet approved it. Of course, the US eventually did decide to share a small portion with Canada and Mexico. But now, Fauci is saying they may not even need the AZ vaccines, and yet, they are still sitting on millions of doses. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heal ... SKBN2BO6XS

And yes, wastage is a whole other problem. Sad and tragic, but less egregious, IMO, than hoarding.

aerolimani wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

aerolimani wrote:

Indeed, there should not be any vaccine doses going unused anywhere. Also, I think there should be more acceptance, in the west, of non-western vaccines.

I think you are mixing hoarding with wastage. Hoarding should be avoided, and it will be because these vaccines have short life span.

Wastage is mainly because of logistics involved Ultra Deep Freezer(in the past) - Freezer - Refrigerator - Thaw - Multi dose vile - jab. This issue not west specific.

Combine that with completely chaotic decentralized registration process will lead to wastage.

I know people who registered with CVS, RiteAid, Meijer, County, Beaumont Healthcare system, City of Detroit and walk-ins. If one person registers at six different places, how are they going to plan.

I was responding to Lightsaber's mention of AZ. I believe they are referring to how the USA is sitting on tens of millions of doses of the AZ vaccine which they purchased, but aren't using yet because the FDA has not yet approved it. Of course, the US eventually did decide to share a small portion with Canada and Mexico. But now, Fauci is saying they may not even need the AZ vaccines, and yet, they are still sitting on millions of doses. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heal ... SKBN2BO6XS

And yes, wastage is a whole other problem. Sad and tragic, but less egregious, IMO, than hoarding.

It is US's strategy to invest in and order vaccines from multiple vaccine makers in order to soread out the risk even if a few of them have problem or didn't work.
This strategy have lead to the large selection of vaccines being available on the market nowadays.
If the US didn't invest in this large amount of different vaccines, they might still be researched and produced, with other funding, but that is not a certain thing, and there are no guarantee that they would be available now instead of later times.
I don't see any problem if they're being resold to those who need them when the ultimate supply exceed the number of demand inside the US.

The US is not using them and won’t be using them for at least another what, four weeks?

Hey partner, there you go, you already approved it and you’re short of vaccines but you’re flying right into another wave, here, use them and just give them back to us later, should we really need it, if not, you can just give us the money for it later. But you have hundreds, no, thousands of people dying every day, we can’t just watch that and do nothing while we sit on life saving jabs without even planning on using them soon.

Yeah, that’s what an international partner would do. I think the US has lost a lot of respect from a lot of people on this side of the pond, if you’re going with you hear from some people here.

Is the UK vaccination programme heading for problems?

The UK adopted a strategy of increasing the interval between first and second doses to 12 weeks.

I log data for England (rather than UK). On Jan 11 England had administered

1.959 million first doses
0.374 million second doses

12 weeks later (Apr 5) England had administered 4.344 million second doses (way ahead of the 1.959 million scheduled). In the last 2 weeks the rolling 7 day average relationship between first and second doses has altered from about 6:1 to about 2:3. Is the UK guarding against an inability to give a second dose within the allotted 12 weeks?

I guess the UK is running out of vaccine. I wonder when more stocks of vaccine will become available in the UK. It is starting to look like the first dose programme is reducing to a trickle. First doses administered in England

16 Mar-22 Mar = 2.7 million
23 Mar-29 Mar = 1.8 million
30 Mar-05 Apr = 0.65 million

Can anyone in the know reassure me that the UK vaccination programme is not about to slow down from a sprint to a crawl?

art wrote:

Is the UK vaccination programme heading for problems?

The UK adopted a strategy of increasing the interval between first and second doses to 12 weeks.

I log data for England (rather than UK). On Jan 11 England had administered

1.959 million first doses
0.374 million second doses

12 weeks later (Apr 5) England had administered 4.344 million second doses (way ahead of the 1.959 million scheduled). In the last 2 weeks the rolling 7 day average relationship between first and second doses has altered from about 6:1 to about 2:3. Is the UK guarding against an inability to give a second dose within the allotted 12 weeks?

I guess the UK is running out of vaccine. I wonder when more stocks of vaccine will become available in the UK. It is starting to look like the first dose programme is reducing to a trickle. First doses administered in England

16 Mar-22 Mar = 2.7 million
23 Mar-29 Mar = 1.8 million
30 Mar-05 Apr = 0.65 million

Can anyone in the know reassure me that the UK vaccination programme is not about to slow down from a sprint to a crawl?

We all know the EU cut off the UK from vaccines. Before the UK bought vaccines based on promised delivery. Now they need secured domestic supply.
https://theconversation.com/moderna-and ... own-158196

So the Novavax vaccine did a last minute switch to UK based filled and finish to keep it out of the EU, in my opinion. Considering how good the results were for NovaVax, I suspect the delays in approval are entirely to alter the supply chain. Approval is expected April 15th. Instead of a mixed EU/UK supply network, it will be a UK controlled network.

We also have in Scotland Valneva in production. Just now "fantastic results"
The UK could begin jabbing as early as June (when production is available).
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/valn ... _content=4

Moderna starts to go out 3rd week of April, alas on 500k doses in April (I suspect only 250k will receive this vaccine in April):
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/mod ... 15706.html

There is no doubt having 10 million paid for doses held by the EU hurt the UK's vaccine campaign. However, with 3 new vaccines coming in over the next 3 months, they will recover.

Moderna being jabbed into the arms of 250k people will be nice, but will not exactly chance the course of the virus in the UK.
NovaVax will have to carry the majority of 1st doses until June.
Valneva will start vaccinations in June.
AZ (made in North England) will be available for 1st doses, but much fewer than before when EU supply was available. Most will be 2nd does.

Switching gears means the UK program will slow down. However, the 1st Jab by July still seems possible, just with new vaccines (NovaVax, Valneva, and limited Moderna). There is definitely a slowing of 1st doses going on in the UK, that will not tick up until after NovaVax is distributed.
https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... pean+Union

Lightsaber

#Lightsaber

Thanks for the info.

According to my data and projections England was heading for 85% of population receiving a first dose before the end of June (the other 15% covering people who refused vaccination, people who could not be vaccinated for medical reasons and people who had contracted COVID-19 and recovered). Now I have no firm idea of when all first dose vaccinations will be completed. I have not yet downgraded estimated weekly 1st jabs in my spreadsheet but suspect it will be in August rather than July that we complete first dose jabs.

That's obviously a shame from the UK's point of view but it also means that other, similar societies trailing the UK in vaccination will not receive the benefit of seeing in advance what effect opening up steps have on infection rates and perhaps avoid 'mistakes' made by the UK.

DocLightning wrote:

flyingclrs727 wrote:

KFTG wrote:

Single dose nasal vaccine in testing is apparently effective against COVID-19, with trials still underway
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/c ... al-vaccine

I could hold out for something like that for a booster. A vaccine that produces an immune response in the lungs and nasal cavity could really cut down on transmission.

The current ones do, but one with no needle is also better for hesitancy, for reducing medical waste, and for safety reasons. It amazes me that in 2021 when we can directly introduce mRNA into living cells in living people and deftly alter the genetic architecture of a virus so as to make it do our bidding, we are still giving vaccines with a Victorian-era invention, the hypodermic needle.

Fun fact: according to some sources, the first overdose death due to intravenous administration was the spouse of the hypodermic needle’s inventor.

luckyone wrote:

DocLightning wrote:

flyingclrs727 wrote:

I could hold out for something like that for a booster. A vaccine that produces an immune response in the lungs and nasal cavity could really cut down on transmission.

The current ones do, but one with no needle is also better for hesitancy, for reducing medical waste, and for safety reasons. It amazes me that in 2021 when we can directly introduce mRNA into living cells in living people and deftly alter the genetic architecture of a virus so as to make it do our bidding, we are still giving vaccines with a Victorian-era invention, the hypodermic needle.

Fun fact: according to some sources, the first overdose death due to intravenous administration was the spouse of the hypodermic needle’s inventor.

Denmark seems to think AZ's blood clot issue is related to IV vs IM, so they standardized on aspirate before inject. On the other hand UK thinks AZ blood clots are specific to young women on pregnancy control pills.

I would be very happy if nasal option is made available.

dtw2hyd wrote:

Denmark seems to think AZ's blood clot issue is related to IV vs IM, so they standardized on aspirate before inject.

I'm so puzzled by this because that's the technique I was taught for all IM and SQ injections.

NovaVax to start child and teen trials 2Q2021
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medica ... NewsSearch

DocLightning wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

Denmark seems to think AZ's blood clot issue is related to IV vs IM, so they standardized on aspirate before inject.

I'm so puzzled by this because that's the technique I was taught for all IM and SQ injections.

Could I get a translation of what this short code means in terms of innoculation? Could this be a difference in national jabbing technique?

Lightsaber

Normally I avoid talking too much about deaths, but I now believe vaccination data is being reflected in them:
https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... RE~GBR~CHL

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... +Union~ARE

To my eye, inverse ratio of deaths to number vaccinated, with a discount or time delay gor Chile and the UAE.

The more vaccinated, the better.

Lightsaber

I read that Japan usually use SQ injection for most of their vaccine due to past incidents of side effect caused by IM injection (of antibiotics and antipyretic), but they switched to IM injection for coronavirus vaccine, due to the nature of mRNA vaccine

The governors of Florida and Texas have signed executive orders prohibiting the implementation of "vaccine passport" requirements by the state government out of concern for privacy. Fun fact, both Florida and Texas require vaccinations for children to enter school. What's the difference?

lightsaber wrote:

Normally I avoid talking too much about deaths, but I now believe vaccination data is being reflected in them:
https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... RE~GBR~CHL

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... +Union~ARE

To my eye, inverse ratio of deaths to number vaccinated, with a discount or time delay gor Chile and the UAE.

The more vaccinated, the better.

Lightsaber

Agreed.

Yes, it can be a bit macabre, and it runs the risk of desensitization, to discuss death statistics. However, I feel it is the most important measure of the effectiveness of vaccines. Becoming ill is never good, but more important is not ending up in hospital, and not dying.

We live with the “common cold” which can be either a rhinovirus or another type of coronavirus. I don’t expect we will ever eliminate SARS-CoV-2. My hope is that we reduce its effects to the point where it becomes just another member of the common cold family.

luckyone wrote:

The governors of Florida and Texas have signed executive orders prohibiting the implementation of "vaccine passport" requirements by the state government out of concern for privacy. Fun fact, both Florida and Texas require vaccinations for children to enter school. What's the difference?

The following is just my opinion.

Schools may only require approved vaccines. Not emergency approval, full approval. Even here in California, they cannot require vaccines until full verification, a 2+ year process that is still ongoing.

So you are confusing regular (approved) vaccines that are proven safe and long term effective and the Covid19 vaccines which we are discussing.

Schools are known breeding grounds for disease. My grandfather used to have to tell the parents of unvaccinated kids there child was now an imbicile due to vacinatable diseases. Usually measles, sometimes Mumps.

To not vaccinate requires too much distancing to be long term practical, again, just my opinion. But the requirement for vaccination is, in my opinion, legally challenging until full approval.

This disease will continue to spread as long as there is a large group of the unvacvinated. School kids are an obvious example of a bad potential pocket. I won't send my kids at full density without them being vaccinated. Short term I'm ok with unvaccinated kids. After full approval of vaccines? No.

I only want to hang around the vaccinated for risk management. My group of friends now requires vaccination and my previous exposure plus one dose barely meets their guidelines (constantly ratcheting up). I won't be subtle about telling restaurant owners that I expect their staff to be vaccinated once everyone can get a vaccine (not just sign up, but that they are truly available).

I will happily show my white card. What I will not tolerate is being tracked, so no cell phone app. e.g., when I chose to see my Aunt who has chosen to not vaccinate, that is only my business; but that will not happen until my kids are fully vacinated.

We cannot set a precedent that exceeds the pandemic.

Six weeks after vaccines are readily available (everyone, including kids can get one with little delay) will be time to party!!!

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

We also have in Scotland Valneva in production. Just now "fantastic results"
The UK could begin jabbing as early as June (when production is available).
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/valn ... _content=4

While I share your enthusiasm for the Valneva vaccine, June seems rather optimistic. They still have to initiate a pivotal, Phase 3 clinical trial (start by the end of April 2021) and themselves expect to submit to the MHRA in the autumn 2021.
https://valneva.com/press-release/valne ... e-vla2001/

I read somewhere (but can't find the link anymore) that the vaccine is based on a technic often used for children vaccine, hence it could help vaccinate children and perhaps convince a few anti vaccine people?

Best regards, and stay safe
Jonas

Any "vaccine passport" (convenient, nice sounding term eh?) would immediately be challenged in court, even if a private entity requires it.
Why? These vaccines (I have already been Pfizer'd) are only being administered via an emergency approval.

AirbusCheerlead wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

We also have in Scotland Valneva in production. Just now "fantastic results"
The UK could begin jabbing as early as June (when production is available).
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/valn ... _content=4

While I share your enthusiasm for the Valneva vaccine, June seems rather optimistic. They still have to initiate a pivotal, Phase 3 clinical trial (start by the end of April 2021) and themselves expect to submit to the MHRA in the autumn 2021.
https://valneva.com/press-release/valne ... e-vla2001/

I read somewhere (but can't find the link anymore) that the vaccine is based on a technic often used for children vaccine, hence it could help vaccinate children and perhaps convince a few anti vaccine people?

Best regards, and stay safe
Jonas

I happen to agree June is optimistic, however I think it can be done. The better the results, the faster the trial.

Any which way, the UK needs more vaccine.

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

Could I get a translation of what this short code means in terms of innoculation? Could this be a difference in national jabbing technique?

Lightsaber

An IM injection is intramuscular. You inject straight down (perpendicular) through the skin so that the needle goes into the muscle. SQ (sometimes abbreviated SC) is subcutaneous. You pinch up the skin and then go in at an angle to get into the fatty layer of tissue just under the skin but over the muscle. The tissues have different properties (blood flow, immune cells, etc.) and so in theory injection into one is different than into the other. For example, most vaccines are given IM, but the measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella vaccines are given SQ (I don't actually know why, but I would be unsurprised if it turns out that the answer is just "because that's how the trials were done" and there isn't a good biological reason).

In any event, my training (and I'm US-based) was that during any such injection, you insert the needle and then briefly pull back on the plunger to ensure that you don't see a flash of blood in the syringe, which would indicate that you've accidentally entered a blood vessel. The argument against this is that it's difficult to get into a blood vessel intentionally, so to suppose that there's actually a substantial risk of getting it into a blood vessel by accident is a bit absurd. But my response is that the brief pull back on the plunger takes less than half a second and doesn't cause any harm, so why not do it? So the way the Danish authorities are saying it should be done is the way I've always done it, and most US-trained health professionals. I'm afraid I don't know how they are trained in other countries.

I think that the Danish authorities are making some guesses.

lightsaber wrote:

Schools may only require approved vaccines. Not emergency approval, full approval. Even here in California, they cannot require vaccines until full verification, a 2+ year process that is still ongoing.

A friend of mine who is a professor of law and specializing in vaccination-related legal issues thinks that there is no substantial legal barrier to requiring vaccination with an EUA product in a pandemic. I'm not a legal expert, but she has some arguments. Here's a link to an article she wrote: https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu ... ccine-eua/

Cornell has announced that they will be requiring students to be vaccinated if they want to return to campus, so they seem to be of the opinion that this mandate is legal.

https://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXZQOUC ... 0C2000000/

AstraZeneca collaborated vaccine production line have start producing vaccines and is now applying for production and distribution license.
They are expected to produce 90 Million dose of vaccine for Japan, out of the total order of 120 Million dose they have taken for Japan

DocLightning wrote:

In any event, my training (and I'm US-based) was that during any such injection, you insert the needle and then briefly pull back on the plunger to ensure that you don't see a flash of blood in the syringe, which would indicate that you've accidentally entered a blood vessel. The argument against this is that it's difficult to get into a blood vessel intentionally, so to suppose that there's actually a substantial risk of getting it into a blood vessel by accident is a bit absurd. But my response is that the brief pull back on the plunger takes less than half a second and doesn't cause any harm, so why not do it? So the way the Danish authorities are saying it should be done is the way I've always done it, and most US-trained health professionals. I'm afraid I don't know how they are trained in other countries.

I managed to hit a blood vessel during an injection. It was perhaps one of the first dozen or so injections I administered during medical school, so naturally it gave me quite the start. Never did it again, but I've obviously never forgotten it.

Even diabetics who do several hundred (or a few thousand - me) a year report seldom or almost never hitting a blood vessel. Some of us think we may have at least once over the years. Likely if you inject into a blood vessel you would get an immediate drop in blood sugars.

62 million doses of J&J to be, in my words, batch sampled. The article is hyperbolic, but the doses must be verified. The gift that keeps on giving...


https://www.businessinsider.com/million ... nyt-2021-4

c933103 wrote:

https://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXZQOUC066KJ0W1A400C2000000/

AstraZeneca collaborated vaccine production line have start producing vaccines and is now applying for production and distribution license.
They are expected to produce 90 Million dose of vaccine for Japan, out of the total order of 120 Million dose they have taken for Japan

This is great news!

I hope all goes well.

Lightsaber

I hope the USA will send AZ to Brazil. Deaths over 4,000 in a day. The "biological Fukushima" was sad and amusing in a weird way.

https://www.bing.com/amp/s/amp.theguard ... g-in-japan

lightsaber wrote:

art wrote:

Is the UK vaccination programme heading for problems?

The UK adopted a strategy of increasing the interval between first and second doses to 12 weeks.

I log data for England (rather than UK). On Jan 11 England had administered

1.959 million first doses
0.374 million second doses

12 weeks later (Apr 5) England had administered 4.344 million second doses (way ahead of the 1.959 million scheduled). In the last 2 weeks the rolling 7 day average relationship between first and second doses has altered from about 6:1 to about 2:3. Is the UK guarding against an inability to give a second dose within the allotted 12 weeks?

I guess the UK is running out of vaccine. I wonder when more stocks of vaccine will become available in the UK. It is starting to look like the first dose programme is reducing to a trickle. First doses administered in England

16 Mar-22 Mar = 2.7 million
23 Mar-29 Mar = 1.8 million
30 Mar-05 Apr = 0.65 million

Can anyone in the know reassure me that the UK vaccination programme is not about to slow down from a sprint to a crawl?

We all know the EU cut off the UK from vaccines.

Lightsaber

Please provide a link which proves the EU has actually denied an export to the UK (date, amount, etc).

marcelh wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

art wrote:

Is the UK vaccination programme heading for problems?

The UK adopted a strategy of increasing the interval between first and second doses to 12 weeks.

I log data for England (rather than UK). On Jan 11 England had administered

1.959 million first doses
0.374 million second doses

12 weeks later (Apr 5) England had administered 4.344 million second doses (way ahead of the 1.959 million scheduled). In the last 2 weeks the rolling 7 day average relationship between first and second doses has altered from about 6:1 to about 2:3. Is the UK guarding against an inability to give a second dose within the allotted 12 weeks?

I guess the UK is running out of vaccine. I wonder when more stocks of vaccine will become available in the UK. It is starting to look like the first dose programme is reducing to a trickle. First doses administered in England

16 Mar-22 Mar = 2.7 million
23 Mar-29 Mar = 1.8 million
30 Mar-05 Apr = 0.65 million

Can anyone in the know reassure me that the UK vaccination programme is not about to slow down from a sprint to a crawl?

We all know the EU cut off the UK from vaccines.

Lightsaber

Please provide a link which proves the EU has actually denied an export to the UK (date, amount, etc).

The disputed, paid for quantity is somewhere between 5 and 10 million doses.
Halix has already shipped a batch of unknown size to Britain, MailOnline understands, and is reported to be in possession of five to 10million more doses that the EU and UK are now wrangling over.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... cines.html


EU has made it quite clear no exports to EU. I do not know how much Pfizer has been held up, but one must believe the EU when they say exports are being halted:
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/coronavi ... uxbndlbing

This is over the Halix jabs,:
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/u ... NewsSearch

Threat started about two weeks ago:
https://news.yahoo.com/news/eu-warns-bl ... 09765.html


Not to mention EU holding 3.1m doses for Australia:
https://www.bing.com/amp/s/www.usnews.c ... text%3damp

The is the UK funded the Halix site. This sets a bad precident. There is no doubt AZ muffed production. The question is has the EU used sovereign authority to over-ride contract law? Anyone who has read books by Bernstein on economics doesn't like where that goes...

We've been discussing in this thread a bit. I bet there are better links above.

Now the above links note that the UK makes 2 million doses a week of AZ. Hopefully they can divert resources to increase that production. (We all want more vaccines).

Hopefully NovaVax production is going well.

After further reflection, I agree with other posters in this thread that Valneva by June seems too agressive.

It will be interesting when hesitancy, not supply matters.
https://graphics.reuters.com/HEALTH-COR ... ypmrelyvr/

The percentage of the population willing to take a vaccine will eventually play a role. (chart in above link).

Supply came from penalties in the UK contracts:
Hancock referred to the clauses in the UK’s vaccine supply contracts requiring vaccine producers to supply it preferentially: if there are production shortages, then the UK order must be fulfilled by diverting supplies from other customers. A failure to do so attracts fierce penalties.

As a result, the UK has had its orders fully met, whereas the EU suffered early shortfalls from Pfizer, and is now receiving less than a quarter of what it contracted for from AstraZeneca, which has experienced production problems.


https://theconversation.com/amp/did-the ... nes-157926

We already discussed that the EU contract had similar clauses, but without penalties.

As a matter of law, both the EU and the UK have a case. Both contracts contain a “best reasonable efforts” clause, which is intended to cover the situation where force majeure – a legal term for an event outside one’s control – makes full delivery impossible or unreasonably difficult.

But signing a preferential contract with someone else is not force majeure: it is just selling the same stuff twice.

Unfortunately, vaccines have continually missed production promises. e.g., I see the promises for 2Q2021 and I ask why believe them this time? In my opinion, we will be short again. This is because the grand promises exceed prior production ramp rates:
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/hea ... 6?mode=amp

I believe the best prediction of future performance is past performance. I see the parabolic curves and expect them to continue to accelerate unless there is a major change:

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... pean+Union

Now the UK curve turned down within the timeframe if the EU promising to withhold exports. Hence why in above posts the UK, in my opinion, had no choice but to move the NovaVax supply chain to fully within the UK as per my prior posts.

Moderna is now going out in the UK (but only 500k doses expected in April per prior posts);
https://www.bing.com/amp/s/mobile.reute ... SKBN2BU0KG

UK claims 12 million doses coming in April. My math says that means at least a few million NovaVax doses for the UK.
https://www.republicworld.com/world-new ... ister.html

Lightsaber

KFTG wrote:

Any "vaccine passport" (convenient, nice sounding term eh?) would immediately be challenged in court, even if a private entity requires it.
Why? These vaccines (I have already been Pfizer'd) are only being administered via an emergency approval.

I think that the countries of the world should sit down and agree on the nature of a 'vaccine passport' eg agree vaccination with which vaccines (and time elapsed since final jab) to qualify for a 'vaccine passport'. The sooner that people can move freely (sit in their local bar, step on a plane to go to the other side of the world), the better for all of us.

lightsaber wrote:

EU has made it quite clear no exports to EU. I do not know how much Pfizer has been held up, but one must believe the EU when they say exports are being halted:
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/coronavi ... uxbndlbing

Dear Lightsaber,

The EU communication a about covid vaccine export ban has certainly created some worries among countries outside the bloc. But as far as I can tell, the only vaccine affected by it is AZ.

For the UK:

• If deliveries of Pfizer were blocked, we should find countless articles in the UK press, but not a word.
• UK media talks about imminent arrival of Moderna jabs, but those will come from EU (produced in CH, but "fill & finish" in Spain).
• Novavax still has likely EU content, for exemple Novavax’ Matrix-M adjuvant is produced in Sweden, Danemark and US (old link from Novavax, but don't think it changed).
  https://ir.novavax.com/news-releases/ne ... ment-serum
  Also Baxter BioPharma Solutions will produce Novavax in Halle, Germany and crank out supplies for the European and UK markets => since EU hasn't firmed the order I think some or many vaccine will go to the UK from there.
  https://biobuzz.io/novavax-taps-baxter- ... -line/amp/
• Not sure when and if UK will use J&J, but they likely too will come from European factories.

For the US:

• The first article you cited about the regrettable mix up and destruction of 15 Mio J&J jabs, said that the 20 Mio Jabs that came from the Factory in the Netherlands (EU) weren't affected. So no export bam here.

For Canada:

• I regularly watch the vaccination numbers on the webpage of Swiss TV. Canada seems to be raising link the EU (last number I saw was Germany 18.0 and Canada 17.9/100k) thus Pfizer deliveries seem steady.
  You might have you own link, but here the Swiss TV (in German) https://www.srf.ch/news/international/c ... n-weltweit

For Australia:

• While AZ didn't arrive all (or the famous 3.1 Mio out of 3.8 Mio), Pfizer arrives at over 100k jabs/week for a total of 870k and the next +100k probably already in the plane or airport on their way down under
  https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... ine-claims

Best regards and stay safe,
Jonas

art wrote:

KFTG wrote:

Any "vaccine passport" (convenient, nice sounding term eh?) would immediately be challenged in court, even if a private entity requires it.
Why? These vaccines (I have already been Pfizer'd) are only being administered via an emergency approval.

I think that the countries of the world should sit down and agree on the nature of a 'vaccine passport' eg agree vaccination with which vaccines (and time elapsed since final jab) to qualify for a 'vaccine passport'. The sooner that people can move freely (sit in their local bar, step on a plane to go to the other side of the world), the better for all of us.

I think that would have been nice, but I think that train has already left the station. The EU for example presented it's version 2 week ago (paper Form and App for call phones)...

Best regards and stay safe,
Jonas

art wrote:

KFTG wrote:

Any "vaccine passport" (convenient, nice sounding term eh?) would immediately be challenged in court, even if a private entity requires it.
Why? These vaccines (I have already been Pfizer'd) are only being administered via an emergency approval.

I think that the countries of the world should sit down and agree on the nature of a 'vaccine passport' eg agree vaccination with which vaccines (and time elapsed since final jab) to qualify for a 'vaccine passport'. The sooner that people can move freely (sit in their local bar, step on a plane to go to the other side of the world), the better for all of us.

It’s such a tough issue for me. I want everyone who can be safely vaccinated to be vaccinated. However, there’s a myriad of questions there, about civil rights. I believe that vaccines should not be forced on anyone, neither by law, nor by coercion. Creating a two-class society of vaccinated versus non, with more privileges for the vaccinated, is definitely coercion. So, I fall on the side of not wanting vaccine passports.

Just to be clear, I am pro-vaccine. I want mine as soon as possible.

art wrote:

I think that the countries of the world should sit down and agree on the nature of a 'vaccine passport' eg agree vaccination with which vaccines (and time elapsed since final jab) to qualify for a 'vaccine passport'. The sooner that people can move freely (sit in their local bar, step on a plane to go to the other side of the world), the better for all of us.

If individual nations want to implement vaccine passports within their own borders go for it, in time once accepted, passports can be created to cure a wide variety of society ills, since they will be mandated by government in the best interest of society.....imagine the possibilities.

https://news.rthk.hk/rthk/ch/component/ ... 210408.htm
Hong Kong: A government expert say Hong Kong government should not proceed buying AstraZeneca vaccines, despite agreement in place
He claim that, the Hong Kong givernment agreement with AstraZeneca should be preliminary and AZ still haven't apply for emergency use authorization in Hong Kong, and as information appears that AZ have low effectiveness against South African variant and have risk of rare blood clot, he think it's not a good choice. He also think the government shouldn't buy the vaccine for elderlies, comment that it'd be inviting troubles.
He said, as there are already second generation vaccines that cover variant virus in research, and as Hong Kong currently have no variant virus in the community and the two current vaccines are already effective, it is possible to take time and see data of other vaccines before making purchase decision, and claim that J&J vaccine would be a good choice among current availables.


https://www.cna.com.tw/news/firstnews/202104080095.aspx
Taiwan: vaccination strategy will be reviewed amid report of very rare side effect of AstraZeneca vaccines

art wrote:

KFTG wrote:

Any "vaccine passport" (convenient, nice sounding term eh?) would immediately be challenged in court, even if a private entity requires it.
Why? These vaccines (I have already been Pfizer'd) are only being administered via an emergency approval.

I think that the countries of the world should sit down and agree on the nature of a 'vaccine passport' eg agree vaccination with which vaccines (and time elapsed since final jab) to qualify for a 'vaccine passport'. The sooner that people can move freely (sit in their local bar, step on a plane to go to the other side of the world), the better for all of us.

Impossible to have international standard.

c933103 wrote:

art wrote:

KFTG wrote:

Any "vaccine passport" (convenient, nice sounding term eh?) would immediately be challenged in court, even if a private entity requires it.
Why? These vaccines (I have already been Pfizer'd) are only being administered via an emergency approval.

I think that the countries of the world should sit down and agree on the nature of a 'vaccine passport' eg agree vaccination with which vaccines (and time elapsed since final jab) to qualify for a 'vaccine passport'. The sooner that people can move freely (sit in their local bar, step on a plane to go to the other side of the world), the better for all of us.

Impossible to have international standard.

I've carried one of these for a couple decades now:



It's an internationally accepted standard, and already required for some countries (yellow fever, etc.)

It surely could do with some modernisation, but it's not a new concept.

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-5666396 ... m2=twitter

An interesting graphic on AZ, as someone who believes in looking at the numbers, that does explain why AZ is not for the under 30.
Bummer. But with new information, one must change opinions. This is quite the handicap in the global vaccine effort.



As that link notes, AZ has "broken the link" between infections and death by protecting the elderly and notes the infections are now trending younger (not vaccinated0.

One can definitely see a benefit of vaccines in the infection rates, however it is my opinion Portugal did a very successful lockdown. It looks like the EU
hhttps://ourworldindata.org/explorers/c ... SR~POL~PRT


So the question becomes, will Novavax be available enough for the UK to protect the younger? The BBC link notes infections in children. If as per above on AZ exports are effected, will there be enough Pfizer for the children in the UK? Israel will vaccinate kids with Pfizer as FDA approval occurs:
https://www.ynetnews.com/health_science ... ry111d6YBO

Lightsaber

Moderna vaccine now proven to last over 6 months:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medica ... uxbndlbing

As these are emergency approval vaccines, I would expect a similar press release every 3 months or so as they determine how well the vaccine persists. That means J&J should report is a few months the same information.

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-56663969?at_campaign=64&at_custom1=%5Bpost+type%5D&at_custom4=7FD2E072-97FD-11EB-9B0A-159C4744363C&at_medium=custom7&at_custom2=twitter

An interesting graphic on AZ, as someone who believes in looking at the numbers, that does explain why AZ is not for the under 30.
Bummer. But with new information, one must change opinions.

Change opinions? According to some members over here it was the "incompetence of the EU" and "for political use in Germany and France to distract from internal issues".