Vaccine Progress, Approval, and Deployment

[ainsworth74]

Am all in for getting this jab as soon as it's offered to me.

Absolutely. There's been some accusations of "vaccine snobbery" as well floating around on social media and I'm just here thinking to myself: "I don't care which vaccine it is just give it to me damn it!"

 

[nlogax]

Absolutely. There's been some accusations of "vaccine snobbery" as well floating around on social media and I'm just here thinking to myself: "I don't care which vaccine it is just give it to me damn it!"

I've read about that weird snobbery too. Some people are just..odd!

 

[YorkshireBear]

What's odd is people wanting the British AZ one when actually others appear to be more effective.

 

[Domh245]

I'm personally hoping that when I'm offered one, I get the Pfizer (or Moderna) one - primarily because after all this disruption the very least the government can do is pay more for my vaccine rather than the at-cost AstraZeneca one! I won't be declining any offer though for sure

 

[XAM2175]

A colleague had his first vaccination on Saturday and spent most of Sunday afternoon and into Monday with a low grade fever / flu-like symptoms. As of today he's back on top form. I highly doubt that's the normal experience and if that's the worst that is happening, fine.

Your immune system is mounting a defence against what it believes is a viable infection, so if anything a brief period of minor symptoms like that is an indication that the vaccine has provoked the desired response.

 

[nlogax]

Your immune system is mounting a defence against what it believes is a viable infection, so if anything a brief period of minor symptoms like that is an indication that the vaccine has provoked the desired response.

I've read it's usually just a painful and heavy arm for about 24 hours after the jab. Certainly was that for my flu jab the other day.

 

[jumble]

Must admit I am concerned about all the reports of people feeling ill after vaccination and younger people being affected I wonder how wide spread or common this is?

As my mate said yesterday
Give 9 Million people any drug ( even aspirin) and some will have side effects
Even 0.01% will be 900 people

 

[ainsworth74]

I've read about that weird snobbery too. Some people are just..odd!

Absolutely! Many of them inhabit this Forum!

I'm personally hoping that when I'm offered one, I get the Pfizer (or Moderna) one - primarily because after all this disruption the very least the government can do is pay more for my vaccine rather than the at-cost AstraZeneca one!

Oh yes that's a good point. Seems like the least they could do for those of us who have been staying at home, losing our jobs, suffering mental health issues is fork out for the more expensive vaccine!

 

[Bertie the bus]

I wouldn't listen to the news too much, I can't expect it to be "many" staff that have refused. Look at France and their reactions to having the injections (only 30% would take it -v- 71% in UK (France latest data, UK based on 31st Dec) and that truly is bad with poor support from the government!

PA are reporting around 1/5th of care home staff are declining the vaccine. Some of the reports I've seen are making a big deal of it but an 80% uptake is excellent. It exceeds the annual flu jab uptake amongst those offered it and they, unlike care home staff, are considered vulnerable. Anybody who is expecting 100% or even an uptake in the high 90s amongst any group is deluded.

 

[MikeWM]

What's odd is people wanting the British AZ one when actually others appear to be more effective.

I'm not sure that is particularly odd at all. Given the choice between two medicines, one of which is a variant of existing products with probably well-understood side-effects and contraindications, and one which is entirely new and hasn't been around long enough to know whether there is the potential for long-term issues or indeed what those issues may be, many people would prefer the former.

(I'm sure there is some element of 'prefer British' at play with some people too, but don't assume that's the only factor).

 

[52290]

I've read it's usually just a painful and heavy arm for about 24 hours after the jab. Certainly was that for my flu jab the other day.

I had the AZ bargain basement one last Friday and I'm feeling fine. They only tell you which one you are getting minutes before they stick the needle in you.

 

[adc82140]

I had the Pfizer one. Felt a bit off the next morning with a 38.5 temperature, but I was fine by lunchtime after a couple of paracetamol.

 

[nlogax]

PA are reporting around 1/5th of care home staff are declining the vaccine. Some of the reports I've seen are making a big deal of it but an 80% uptake is excellent. It exceeds the annual flu jab uptake amongst those offered it and they, unlike care home staff, are considered vulnerable. Anybody who is expecting 100% or even an uptake in the high 90s amongst any group is deluded.

Do we know what the estimated take-up rate for Covid vaccines is across the population as a whole and whether this has been factored into estimated wait times?

 

[HSTEd]

Right now I believe the estimates are on 100% takeup, and takeup amongst medical staff is on order 80% - heavily ethnically influenced however

 

[nlogax]

Right now I believe the estimates are on 100% takeup, and takeup amongst medical staff is on order 80% - heavily ethnically influenced however

Ta. Let's see what the actual takeup figures average out at across non-medical workers in coming months. I have high hopes but I'm reading of some NHS systems issues that are getting in the way of vaccine deployment in certain hotspots (NW London for one).

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

More promising news about the Ox/AZ vaccine.

COVID-19: Oxford vaccine may reduce transmission by 67% - and protection 'remains for three-month jab interval'

Test results by the University of Oxford shows a 67% reduction in positive COVID-19 swabs among those vaccinated.

news.sky.com

The Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine may have a "substantial effect" on transmission of coronavirus, and a three-month gap between doses does not lower protection, according to a report.

Tests results by University of Oxford, published in a pre-print report with The Lancet, showed a 67% reduction in positive swabs among those vaccinated.

In the report, the university also said that a single standard dose of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine is 76% effective from day 22 to day 90 after the jab.

This means protection is not reduced in the three months between the first and second dose.

The report supports the government's strategy that rolling out first doses - with a second dose after three months - is effective at reducing disease.

After the second dose, efficacy is 82.4% - if the interval between jabs is three months.

 

[Domh245]

The bit about the 12 week dosing strategy is brilliant vindication for the JCVI team. Quoting from the paper itself (as the quoted section of the Sky story doesn't have it)

Vaccine efficacy after a single standard dose of vaccine from day 22 to day 90 post vaccination was 76% (59%, 86%), and modelled analysis indicated that protection did not wane during this initial 3 month period. Similarly, antibody levels were maintained during this period with minimal waning by day 90 day (GMR 0.66, 95% CI 0.59, 0.74).In the SD/SD group, after the second dose, efficacy was higher with a longer prime-boost interval: VE 82.4% 95%CI 62.7%, 91.7% at 12+ weeks, compared with VE 54.9%, 95%CI 32.7%, 69.7% at <6 weeks. These observations are supported by immunogenicity data which showed binding antibody responses more than 2-fold higher after an interval of 12 or more weeks compared with and interval of less than 6 weeks GMR 2.19 (2.12, 2.26) in those who were 18-55 years of age.

The longer the dose interval, the better the efficacy. Not a case of "does not lower protection" so much as actively improves it!

 

[hwl]

The bit about the 12 week dosing strategy is brilliant vindication for the JCVI team. Quoting from the paper itself (as the quoted section of the Sky story doesn't have it)



The longer the dose interval, the better the efficacy. Not a case of "does not lower protection" so much as actively improves it!

Agreed - the reason for short gap is 2 fold:
a) with previous two dose vaccines the longer the gap the fewer people come back for the second dose hence compromise between the 2.
b) with covid jab approval time pressures they wanted to keep the gap as low as possible to get quicker approval.

University press release:

Oxford coronavirus vaccine shows sustained protection of 76% during the 3-month interval until the second dose

Analyses reveal single standard dose efficacy from day 22 to day 90 post vaccination of 76% with protection not falling in this three-month periodAfter the second dose vaccine efficacy from two standard doses is 82.4% with the 3-month interval being used in the UK. (82.4% effective, with a 95%...

www.ox.ac.uk

Additional interesting bits in red...

Oxford coronavirus vaccine shows sustained protection of 76% during the 3-month interval until the second dose​

• Analyses reveal single standard dose efficacy from day 22 to day 90 post vaccination of 76% with protection not falling in this three-month period
• After the second dose vaccine efficacy from two standard doses is 82.4% with the 3-month interval being used in the UK. (82.4% effective, with a 95% confidence interval of 62.7% - 91.7% at 12+ weeks)
• Data supports the 4-12 week prime-boost dosing interval recommended by many global regulators
• Analyses of PCR positive swabs in UK population suggests vaccine may have substantial effect on transmission of the virus with 67% reduction in positive swabs among those vaccinated
• Researchers at the University of Oxford have today published in Preprints with The Lancet an analysis of further data from the ongoing trials of the vaccine. In this, they reveal that the vaccine efficacy is higher at longer prime-boost intervals, and that a single dose of the vaccine is 76% effective from 22- to up to 90-days post vaccination.
  
  In this preprint, which is currently under review at The Lancet, they report on an analysis of additional data to include information from the trial up to the 7th December 2020, which includes a further 201 cases of primary symptomatic COVID-19 (332 cases from 131 reported in previously), They report that the effect of dosing interval on efficacy is pronounced, with vaccine efficacy rising from 54.9% with an interval of less than six weeks to 82.4% when spaced 12 or more weeks apart.
  
  They also detail that a single standard dose of the vaccine is 76% effective at protecting from primary symptomatic COVID-19 for the first 90 days post vaccination, once the immune system has built this protection 22 days after the vaccination, with the protection showing little evidence of waning in this period.
  
  Professor Andrew Pollard, Chief Investigator of the Oxford Vaccine Trial, and co-author, said:
  
  ‘These new data provide an important verification of the interim data that was used by more than 25 regulators including the MHRA and EMA to grant the vaccine emergency use authorisation.
  
  ‘It also supports the policy recommendation made by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) for a 12-week prime-boost interval, as they look for the optimal approach to roll out, and reassures us that people are protected from 22 days after a single dose of the vaccine.’
  
  The exploratory analyses presented in this preprint suggest that it is the dosing interval and not the dosing level which has a great impact on the efficacy of the vaccine. This is in line with previous research supporting greater efficacy with longer prime-boost intervals done with other vaccines such as influenza, Ebola and malaria.
  
  The authors also report further on the potential for the vaccine to reduce transmission of the virus, based on swabs obtained from volunteers in the UK arms of the trial with a 67% reduction after the first dose of the vaccine.
  
  They also hope to report data regarding the new variants in the coming days, and expect the findings to be broadly similar to those already reported by fellow vaccine developers.

The potential transmission reduction is very good news.

This does of course create slight problems for those on the continent who have been criticising the UK strategy (as things weren't going so well locally) as there is now data that is harder to quibble with. This of course no give them the option to vaccinate a lot more people with the limited Ox/AZ doses available sooner but they probably won't.

Many countries on the continent recommending not using the Ox/Az vaccine on over 65s so will the older age group study in the States report good efficacy as next week's good vaccine news and give them more PR headaches?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Agreed - the reason for short gap is 2 fold:
a) with previous two dose vaccines the longer the gap the fewer people come back for the second dose hence compromise between the 2.
b) with covid jab approval time pressures they wanted to keep the gap as low as possible to get quicker approval.

University press release:

Oxford coronavirus vaccine shows sustained protection of 76% during the 3-month interval until the second dose

Analyses reveal single standard dose efficacy from day 22 to day 90 post vaccination of 76% with protection not falling in this three-month periodAfter the second dose vaccine efficacy from two standard doses is 82.4% with the 3-month interval being used in the UK. (82.4% effective, with a 95%...

www.ox.ac.uk

Additional interesting bits in red...

This is excellent news and should give Boris more ammunition to accelerate relaxation of restrictions. Scotland have consented to limited return of education from 22/2 England needs to follow suit in areas of low prevalence from same date not wait till 8/3.

 

[hwl]

This is excellent news and should give Boris more ammunition to accelerate relaxation of restrictions. Scotland have consented to limited return of education from 22/2 England needs to follow suit in areas of low prevalence from same date not wait till 8/3.

While it is good news it only really matters is enough people are vaccinated and that is that challenge everywhere so it doesn't change too much.
The transmission reduction number is useful for later restriction removal.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

While it is good news it only really matters is enough people are vaccinated and that is that challenge everywhere so it doesn't change too much.
The transmission reduction number is useful for later restriction removal.

Granted but this is about looking forward and having confidence in the vaccination programme to deliver the outcome we are all seeking and if it does what it says on the tin we need to be ready to take advantage. This is why the relaxation roadmap should be published already and then dates can be added on a weekly basis as the data evolves.

 

[Domh245]

This is excellent news and should give Boris more ammunition to accelerate relaxation of restrictions. Scotland have consented to limited return of education from 22/2 England needs to follow suit in areas of low prevalence from same date not wait till 8/3.

It's the 3 week waiting period for the immune response to have taken effect that's the issue, and unsurprisingly, the 8th of March is 21 days on from 15th Feb - or VE day (vaccinated the elderly) as I'll now call it!

The roadmap in terms of removing restrictions would certainly be nice but given that many of the issues we've faced so far have been because of rushing to reopen, I'm certainly willing to accept a slightly slower easing this time around, especially as the 'end' is in sight.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

It's the 3 week waiting period for the immune response to have taken effect that's the issue, and unsurprisingly, the 8th of March is 21 days on from 15th Feb - or VE day (vaccinated the elderly) as I'll now call it!

The roadmap in terms of removing restrictions would certainly be nice but given that many of the issues we've faced so far have been because of rushing to reopen, I'm certainly willing to accept a slightly slower easing this time around, especially as the 'end' is in sight.

Im not putting dates to the roadmap and entirely agree that caution needs to be the watchword but with the risk that come Autumn we maybe facing an escalation in cases again we need to use the Spring/Summer period to get economic activity back where its safe to do so just in case that risk is realised. On the 15/2 on a three week look back 7.1m had received first dose so they will be having a moderating impact and these were the most risky groups.

 

[nlogax]

As of today we've reached the ten million mark for those who've received their first vaccination across the UK. Big milestone and it looks like the daily stats indicate the country as a whole continues to be ahead of the original planned schedule. Optimism continues to build.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

As of today we've reached the ten million mark for those who've received their first vaccination across the UK. Big milestone and it looks like the daily stats indicate the country as a whole continues to be ahead of the original planned numbers. Optimism continues to build.

Indeed and on cue BoJo will turn up at 5 tonight and tell us all what a wonderful job he's doing but evade any questions about the point of doing it is so we can get our lives back.

Real credit is to those that have delivered this extraordinary feat which has to be down to it being run by local teams for local people not overpaid centralised bureaucrats from consultancies.

 

[Yew]

As of today we've reached the ten million mark for those who've received their first vaccination across the UK. Big milestone and it looks like the daily stats indicate the country as a whole continues to be ahead of the original planned schedule. Optimism continues to build.

Indeed, it was 12 million by the 15th, wasn't it? We could legitimately be at 16/17 instead; which would be all of group 5.

 

[Domh245]

Indeed, it was 12 million by the 15th, wasn't it? We could legitimately be at 16/17 instead; which would be all of group 5.

It was groups 1-4 by 15th Jan, which they estimated at ~12million in England, ~15million in the UK

 

[Yew]

It was groups 1-4 by 15th Jan, which they estimated at ~12million in England, ~15million in the UK

*grumbles about devolution*


Either way, I think it's fairly probable we'll exceed that. Maybe not by the ~3million that constitutes group 5.

 

[greyman42]

Does anyone know the ADULT population of the UK?

 

[Yew]

Does anyone know the ADULT population of the UK?

Offhand, about 50 million