Would you take the vaccine?

[bspahh]

And please don’t say WHEN it comes out as there may never be one IF it comes out would be more appropriate. Unfortunately a lot of people including the government are taking modern medicine/science for granted and assume there will be a vaccine

The corollary of this is "don't say when IT comes out". There could be many different vaccines.

There are hundreds of different vaccines in development. There are different dosing protocols, different strains of the virus, and differences in the human population.

There will be a balance to strike between mild symptoms for lots of people to save severe symptoms for a few. Some vaccines may be expensive to produce or only available in small quantities. Some might need repeated doses.

To pass a phase III clinical trial, a vaccine needs to work better than a control vaccine. It doesn't mean that it is perfect.

 

[Bantamzen]

Exactly. There is a big difference between wielding massive resources to get things done at pace and rushing. If the vaccine was put out with only phase 2 testing complete, or before the phase 3 results had been analysed, that would be rushed. I don't think anyone is proposing that. Except maybe Putin with what appears to be a Russian copy of one of the vaccine candidates, but that's not our problem.

Eg. The Heathrow third runway was going to take something like a decade to build. In the late 1930s and early 1940s we managed to build entire airfields capable of supporting several bomber squadrons, thousands of people, technical facilities, hangars etc in a matter of months starting with a green field (and quite often with very poor extant transport infrstructure). And we did it hundreds of times. It was done at pace, but was by no means rushed as where those facilities haven't been demolished they are still in place - hangars and runways in particular are often in near pristine condition despite perhaps 60 or 70 years of zero maintenance after abandonment in the years following the second world war.

So yes I'll have the vaccine, but I won't rush because there are people who are far more at risk than me. I would encourage everyone to get vaccinated as soon as they can though, as many of the vulnerable folk will not be able to have it due to problems with their immune systems, and the only way the vaccine will benefit them is if enough in the general community have it to achieve herd immunity.

The Bill Gates conspiracy theorists can do one. I have no time for nonsense like that. I saw someone on Twitter claiming that Swedes have barcodes tattooed onto their arms for test and trace and "monitoring". People actually believed it! Just goes to show that just because there are people pushing these theories doesn't mean it isn't a load of old tripe.

But a fast tracked vaccine is exactly what many politicians are wanting, including some in the UK.

 

[43066]

How can you say the vaccine has been rushed when as far as I am aware doesn't even exist yet? Devoting large scale resources, time and effort doesn't at all mean it is "rushed" to the point of poor safety.

Because this is the first time a vaccine has been developed this quickly. Plus there’s something of a perverse incentive for both drug companies and governments to get this through due to the nature of the pandemic.

That’s a perfectly legitimate concern which many will share and has nothing to do with conspiracy theories.

Yes, I'd expect it will be like Yellow Fever, you'll need a certificate in your passport and need to show it on entering another country or they won't let you in.

Perhaps that’s less likely if it ends up being more in the nature of a flu vaccine i.e. limited in both duration and effectiveness.

 

[Scrotnig]

So yes I'll have the vaccine, but I won't rush because there are people who are far more at risk than me.

Spot on. I won't rush, but not because I fear the safety of it. I won't rush because there are higher priority people than me.

The Bill Gates conspiracy theorists can do one. I have no time for nonsense like that.

Also spot on. Sick of hearing that type of nonsense. See also 5G rubbish.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Perhaps that’s less likely if it ends up being more in the nature of a flu vaccine i.e. limited in both duration and effectiveness.

I still think it likely.

 

[Crossover]

Probably, but likely wouldn't rush for it (I don't count myself as being vulnerable). With regards to the "rush" on getting it out there, is there a chance it could be the new Thalidomide...?

I was thinking more like the Polio sugar cube many of us had as children or that injection that left a blue dot on your left arm for life ( can't think of its name).

TB jab (to the bolded part)?

Are they really going to rush it into production without proper testing, though? All drugs/vaccines etc. go through a rigorous process before they're approved for use on the general public.

I understand medical testing and trials would normally take place over 5 years. Paracetomol was apparently (from a discussion with some of my colleagues from our (non pharma) lab) "rushed" through in 2 years

 

[nlogax]

I still think it likely.

Yes, would agree. C19 is already driving discussion on wider 'proof of immunity' implementations that transcend a paper certification, though from what I've seen it would be via something separate to a passport such as an id card. Biometric passport chips do possess a writable area which isn't current used for anything, I'm sure this has already been looked at by those in the know.

 

[MalaiseForever]

No, I do not want to have government microchips in my body controlling my thoughts.

Only joking.

of course I would, as long as it proven to be safe and reasonably effective.

 

[Darandio]

I'm not an anti-vaxxer but the whole way that they seem to be dependent on a vaccine makes me think it will be rushed and any connections to Bill Gates also makes me wary.

Would you take a vaccine against COVID-19 when it comes out?

I'd really like you to explain your reasoning behind your wariness to any Bill Gates connection. Is it the contantly debunked microchip conspiracy theory? If so, get a grip.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd really like you to explain your reasoning behind your wariness to any Bill Gates connection. Is it the contantly debunked microchip conspiracy theory? If so, get a grip.

It's a complete load of conspiratorial tin-foil-hat rubbish. Bill Gates has earnt enough money, he's now very much a philanthropist.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Given I am likely to be towards the back of the line for a vaccine (as a relatively healthy 30 something), then yes as any side effects should be well known by the time I would get to have it.
If I was one of the first people - I'd probably be a bit more cautious but likely still would.

any connections to Bill Gates also makes me wary

Why?

 

[Howardh]

Yes. I asctally applied to do the early trials but was aged-out, they didn't want (at the time anyway) over 55's, yet that's the group that will get them first in all probability! Would have had to travel to Liverpool several times at set times though, which may have messed up any holiday plans. Still wanted to do it though.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I think there maybe a Nobel Prize for the winner of the vaccine contest. I keep volunteering to test but keep getting rejected.

 

[trebor79]

I out my name down to be contacted by vaccine developers looking for volunteers. I got an email yesterday from the Novavax consortium. They are starting to recruit phase 3 volunteers. In the email is says that volunteers will need to attend 6 sessions over a period of 13 months. Presumably after that some further time is required for them to study the data, write reports, draw conclusions, get regulatory sign off (if it is safe and works) etc.
The much-vaunted Oxford vaccine started Phase 3 trials over the summer, so if the timescales are reasonably similar I don't see how Boris and Hancock are still suggesting that it will be ready for mass use in spring, with some limited distribution this year? Is this just another example of them making it up as they go along? Notable that Whitty and Vallance are very careful not to tie vaccine deployment to any particular timetable.

 

[Mojo]

I’m reluctant to take it, unless as others have suggested it’s required to travel abroad.

 

[trebor79]

I don't understand why people would be do reticent. It will be safe as the trials will demonstrate that. Some people worry about possible long term effects, but that's not really possible. It's just some proteins at the end of the day, not polonium210.

 

[takno]

I don't understand why people would be do reticent. It will be safe as the trials will demonstrate that. Some people worry about possible long term effects, but that's not really possible. It's just some proteins at the end of the day, not polonium210.

The trials are being compressed more than usual, and there will be massive pressure on regulators to accept results that they would perhaps reject or request more trials on.

I'm more worried about the long-tail problems which aren't picked up in trials of a few thousand people than I am about the long term effects. Interesting you should compare proteins with polonium210 though, since there are plenty of proteins that can kill you slowly, whilst polonium tends to kill you so quickly that long-term effects are essentially irrelevant

 

[Bantamzen]

I don't understand why people would be do reticent. It will be safe as the trials will demonstrate that. Some people worry about possible long term effects, but that's not really possible. It's just some proteins at the end of the day, not polonium210.

Well yes any vaccine may be just strings if proteins, but they are strings of proteins manufactured by humans to provoke our immune systems to react. This is why we have a long and complex testing and certification process.

If at any point a vaccine reaches certification in the country without any political pressure to rush it through, I would welcome it. But unless I considered myself at risk, I still wouldn't take it because I would rather it be prioritized for those around the globe who need it more.

 

[kristiang85]

This is interesting... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-54375643

Doctors in the West Midlands have been told to plan for a mass coronavirus vaccination scheme from as early as November.

A leaked document identifies two vaccines which are expected to be available this year.

Immunising the entire population could take 10 months and will start with the most vulnerable in care homes.

Mass vaccination sites and mobile facilities are being commissioned as part of as a "fairly massive exercise".

According to the document, the two vaccines are called Ambush and Triumph.

Ambush needs to be stored at -70C (-94F) and kept in hospitals due to regulations set down by the Medicines Health Regulatory Authority.

The Triumph vaccine is expected to be the one developed by Oxford University and AstraZeneca, which can be stored at room temperature.

The document says the vaccines will have to be given in two doses, 28 days apart - and this will be dependent on supply.

Speaking earlier at a Birmingham City Council Covid-19 engagement board, Paul Jennings, Chief Executive of Birmingham and Solihull Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG), said 800,000 people would be prioritised in any rollout.

He said planning for the rollout had already begun, according to the Local Democracy Reporting Service.

 

[WelshBluebird]

The above does match with what I have been reading too and really shouldn't be that surprising.

I believe the vaccines have already been in production with the companies basically producing it at risk. Whilst that is a risky strategy, if the vaccine does pass trials then it will mean the company will be in a much better position to distribute the vaccine than if they waited until it was approved to produce it in large quantities.

The other point to bring up is around transport and distribution. Given the nature of at least one the vaccines (as mentioned above - needing to be stored as such cold temperatures), the logistics part of distribution will be pretty complicated and so it makes sense that they have been putting the bits in place for that to be possible.

The main real questions are:

1. How effective are the vaccines
2. How long will it take to be approved for human use (it may well be that approval for different groups of people will take a different amount of time in order to start rolling out a potential vaccine quicker).

 

[takno]

The above does match with what I have been reading too and really shouldn't be that surprising.

I believe the vaccines have already been in production with the companies basically producing it at risk. Whilst that is a risky strategy, if the vaccine does pass trials then it will mean the company will be in a much better position to distribute the vaccine than if they waited until it was approved to produce it in large quantities.

The other point to bring up is around transport and distribution. Given the nature of at least one the vaccines (as mentioned above - needing to be stored as such cold temperatures), the logistics part of distribution will be pretty complicated and so it makes sense that they have been putting the bits in place for that to be possible.

The main real questions are:

1. How effective are the vaccines
2. How long will it take to be approved for human use (it may well be that approval for different groups of people will take a different amount of time in order to start rolling out a potential vaccine quicker).

I'd say the real questions are when can they start injecting people, and can we reopen the economy again very quickly, or do we have to wait for the vaccines to provide some kind of unfeasible level of cover.

 

[aar0]

The trials are being compressed more than usual, and there will be massive pressure on regulators to accept results that they would perhaps reject or request more trials on.

And you think regulators won't be thinking about any risk to their reputation, livelihood, licence and possible freedom by accepting something dodgy?

I work in science, though not medicine. The hoops you must jump though are endless, and there for a reason. That being said I'm sure there are people who avoid taking the train because they assume that if the driver doses off and goes through a red light then the only safety system has failed and they're seconds from a firebally death.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

And you think regulators won't be thinking about any risk to their reputation, livelihood, licence and possible freedom by accepting something dodgy?

I work in science, though not medicine. The hoops you must jump though are endless, and there for a reason. That being said I'm sure there are people who avoid taking the train because they assume that if the driver doses off and goes through a red light then the only safety system has failed and they're seconds from a firebally death.

+1 - I too am a scientist/engineer. Reputation means a lot.

 

[adc82140]

I'd like an antibody test first. No point in wasting a dose on me if I'm already immune.

 

[packermac]

I’m reluctant to take it, unless as others have suggested it’s required to travel abroad.

I suspect it may well be in governments thinking. Air Asia are already bleating about it being unfair for passengers to have to prove "their vaccination".
It is nothing new I still have my vaccination card (same size as passport) showing smallpox, yellow fever typhoid etc that needed to be current and shown to get into most non European countries back in the 1970's. No valid smallpox not USA entry for example.
I expect Scotland may want it for those coming from England (now there is a thought!)

 

[Peter Mugridge]

This is interesting... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-54375643

I would like to know ( the article doesn't seem to say ) if these leaked documents are recent current ones or if they are older ones from early summer when "November" was being bandied about generally for a vaccine.

 

[takno]

And you think regulators won't be thinking about any risk to their reputation, livelihood, licence and possible freedom by accepting something dodgy?

I work in science, though not medicine. The hoops you must jump though are endless, and there for a reason. That being said I'm sure there are people who avoid taking the train because they assume that if the driver doses off and goes through a red light then the only safety system has failed and they're seconds from a firebally death.

I'm basing my opinions on past conversations with people involved in exactly this kind of medical regulation. It's quite common for side effects to come up after initial license approval, and reading the results of these kinds of studies isn't a simple yes/no process. There are questions you might ask when not under pressure which will not occur to you or you won't have time to ask when you're being leaned on for an answer

Reputation cuts both ways in this case - you don't want to to be the person standing in the way of a vital treatment for reasons that turn out to be unjustified either.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I'd like an antibody test first. No point in wasting a dose on me if I'm already immune.

Good point - i hadn't thought of that.

 

[greyman42]

If one becomes available it might re-assure the public if they see politicians getting it.

 

[furlong]

The government's record so far has been atrocious. Some people argue the number of premature deaths caused by the long period of locking down will far exceed the number who died of or with this virus. What if they make a similar mess of the vaccination programme and end up with more people dead than if they'd simply not bothered? A badly-planned vaccination programme might do that: Too Little of a Good Thing - A Paradox of Moderate Infection Control

They need to view these problems in the round and listen to all points of view and even after they've picked a course of action, be prepared to alter course.