SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)

[rcoobc]

So, actually looking into the data, you have to wonder about their conclusions somewhat

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...eathsregisteredbetween9marchand28december2020

For example, male chefs have had 103.1 deaths per 100,000 (82 deaths) but chefs will have mostly been furloughed for the last year. I wasn't sure if chefs included food prep people in other areas, but looking at the "standard occupation classification" it isn't supposed to

Chefs plan menus and prepare, or oversee the preparation of food in hotels, restaurants, clubs, private households and other establishments.

So chefs have one of the highest deaths per 100,000 people but will have spent a lot of the time not working!

I wondered if they were only going by people who died in work but I don't think that's correct. For the number of people in each profession it says this

Population counts for occupations were obtained from the Annual Population Survey (APS), using data collected in 2019. The APS is the largest ongoing household survey in the UK, based on interviews with members of randomly selected households. The survey covers a range of diverse topics, including information on occupation, which is then coded using the SOC 2010. The population counts were also restricted to those aged 20 to 64 years and were weighted to be representative of those living in England and Wales. Further information on the APS can be found in the APS QMI.

So obviously thats a bit out of date.

Its not like you just use that data as the perfect guide for where to vaccinate

 

[Wolverine]

Usual caveats but potentially excellent news in this thread and more reason of importance of two jabs as recommended by Pfizer, according to that news pointing to 99.99% effectiveness. Also in context of high infectivity rate in the country and 40-50% of cases being of the british B.1.1.7. variant

 

[gormless]

But you have provided no data that emergency services (police) are more at risk than some of those professions. So, that IF, still exists. And you’re still looking to throw a pity party fuelled by self interest.

Its surely in the best interests of society to get Police officers vaccinated. When I was a response officer, the amount of times I went from an incident where I was up close and personal with the type of person who wouldn’t give a feck about COVID restrictions, to a care home via half a dozen houses makes me think Police officers are a risk for transferring the virus into high risk areas.

 

[Sparky_Hughes]

You guys need to agree to disagree (something I’m absolutely terrible at but at least I’m good at recognising it!)

The favourite of parents the world over, do as I say not as I do. If only I had a pound for each time ive said that.

 

[JPRouve]

The favourite of parents the world over, do as I say not as I do. If only I had a pound for each time ive said that.

You would be really fat.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Usual caveats but potentially excellent news in this thread and more reason of importance of two jabs as recommended by Pfizer, according to that news pointing to 99.99% effectiveness. Also in context of high infectivity rate in the country and 40-50% of cases being of the british B.1.1.7. variant

Now that is good news. Pump it into my veins!

(or deltoid, preferably deltoid)

 

[Fingeredmouse]

Usual caveats but potentially excellent news in this thread and more reason of importance of two jabs as recommended by Pfizer, according to that news pointing to 99.99% effectiveness. Also in context of high infectivity rate in the country and 40-50% of cases being of the british B.1.1.7. variant

Now this is exciting news.

 

[TheReligion]

Its surely in the best interests of society to get Police officers vaccinated. When I was a response officer, the amount of times I went from an incident where I was up close and personal with the type of person who wouldn’t give a feck about COVID restrictions, to a care home via half a dozen houses makes me think Police officers are a risk for transferring the virus into high risk areas.

Aye. But shhhhhhhhh. Say it too loudly and you'll be told you're being selfish, thinking of yourself and demanding praise and attention.

The mind boggles.

 

[TheReligion]

Now that is good news. Pump it into my veins!

(or deltoid, preferably deltoid)

I know a few people who have had the the AZ vaccine and felt pretty poorly afterwards. I assume that's normal with a vaccine right?

 

[massi83]

Usual caveats but potentially excellent news in this thread and more reason of importance of two jabs as recommended by Pfizer, according to that news pointing to 99.99% effectiveness. Also in context of high infectivity rate in the country and 40-50% of cases being of the british B.1.1.7. variant

It's good news, but that is not how effectiveness is calculated. And it will be nowhere near that number.

 

[Garethw]

I know a few people who have had the the AZ vaccine and felt pretty poorly afterwards. I assume that's normal with a vaccine right?

A doctor told me that a reaction to a vaccine means that the bodies immune system has its boxing gloves on.

 

[Pexbo]

A doctor told me that a reaction to a vaccine means that the bodies immune system has its boxing gloves on.

I don’t know what this means

 

[Penna]

Re vaccine prioritisation it’s a bit more complicated than prioritising the highest death rate, then working down from there. It’s actually extremely complex from an ethical positions.

In Ireland they give a bit of an explanation and there’s lots of factors to consider. For example, restaurant workers might catch a lot of covid but the cost to society of them being off work sick is a lot lower than losing first responders.

They have devised 12 categories here for vaccine prioritisation, divided into four phases.

Phase One (5% of total population)

1. Frontline health workers (an estimated 1.4 million people)
2. Nursing home staff and residents (570,000 people)
3. Over-80s (4.4 million people)

Phase Two (taking percentage of total population vaccinated to 15 percent):

1. 60-79 year olds
2. People of any age with at least one chronic health condition that puts them at higher risk of falling seriously ill with Covid-19
3. Sociodemographic groups at significantly higher risk of severe illness or death
4. High-risk teachers and school staff

Phase Three (50 percent of population vaccinated):

1. All other teachers and school staff
2. Key workers and others who work in high-risk settings
3. Prison wardens and prisoners
4. People with less serious chronic health conditions

Phase Four (90 percent of population vaccinated):

1. Everyone else

(source - thelocal.it)

We've heard today that the over-80s vaccinations will be delayed by about 4 weeks (some regions were close to starting them), and everyone in the other categories will have to wait for 6-8 weeks longer than planned. Of course, Italy has taken the line of making sure those who've been vaccinated with the first dose receive the second one, in view of the delays in supply, rather than pressing on with giving other people a first dose.

 

[Garethw]

I don’t know what this means

Just his way of explaining the body making antibodies and getting ready to kick a virus’ ass I suppose. I’m not really sure mate, he’s a bit of an eccentric old fool my doc

 

[acnumber9]

Its surely in the best interests of society to get Police officers vaccinated. When I was a response officer, the amount of times I went from an incident where I was up close and personal with the type of person who wouldn’t give a feck about COVID restrictions, to a care home via half a dozen houses makes me think Police officers are a risk for transferring the virus into high risk areas.

Very possibly. That was never my issue, more if there was sufficient risk in other areas that police shouldn’t automatically be right up there just because they’re police, but that’s been done to death. Two other people have given better reasons for them to be higher up the list than he could.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

It's good news, but that is not how effectiveness is calculated. And it will be nowhere near that number.

Seeing as you’re being pedantic, I will too!

That’s definitely not how efficacy is calculated but it’s not far off how effectiveness is calculated. Efficacy is a measure of how well an intervention works in a controlled clinical trial. You need two different interventions for your calculations, ideally drug vs placebo.

Effectiveness is a measure of “real life efficacy”. How well your intervention works after it’s rolled and used in day to day clinical practice. Usually without any comparator at all. So the Israeli data here is a measure of vaccine effectiveness and you don’t need a placebo cohort for comparison.

What you do need is some other matched cohort, if you’re going to talk about a % effectiveness. Similar to that graph you posted yesterday. Because they don’t get placebo it’s not going to be very accurate (people will behave differently after getting what they believe is a vaccine) but it will provide some context. That’s missing here, so we’re really just going off the fact that they’re experiencing a surge, so 20 cases per 128000 seems reassuringly low. The national average over the last 7 days is 536/100k. Although regional variations will mess up any estimates of effectiveness by doing simple maths on those figures.

EDIT: I’m sure you know all this. Just chatting shit mainly for the benefit of anyone else who’s interested.

 

[redshaw]

AZ vaccine only 8% effective in over 65s?
Corona-News am Montag: AstraZeneca-Impfstoff laut Bericht bei Risikogruppe kaum wirksam - DER SPIEGEL

 

[Crackers]

Seeing as you’re being pedantic, I will too!

That’s definitely not how efficacy is calculated but it’s not far off how effectiveness is calculated. Efficacy is a measure of how well an intervention works in a controlled clinical trial. You need two different interventions for your calculations, ideally drug vs placebo.

Effectiveness is a measure of “real life efficacy”. How well your intervention works after it’s rolled and used in day to day clinical practice. Usually without any comparator at all. So the Israeli data here is a measure of vaccine effectiveness and you don’t need a placebo cohort for comparison.

What you do need is some other matched cohort, if you’re going to talk about a % effectiveness. Similar to that graph you posted yesterday. Because they don’t get placebo it’s not going to be very accurate (people will behave differently after getting what they believe is a vaccine) but it will provide some context. That’s missing here, so we’re really just going off the fact that they’re experiencing a surge, so 20 cases per 128000 seems reassuringly low. The national average over the last 7 days is 536/100k. Although regional variations will mess up any estimates of effectiveness by doing simple maths on those figures.

EDIT: I’m sure you know all this. Just chatting shit mainly for the benefit of anyone else who’s interested.

Thanks, this was really informative.

 

[massi83]

Seeing as you’re being pedantic, I will too!

That’s definitely not how efficacy is calculated but it’s not far off how effectiveness is calculated. Efficacy is a measure of how well an intervention works in a controlled clinical trial. You need two different interventions for your calculations, ideally drug vs placebo.

Effectiveness is a measure of “real life efficacy”. How well your intervention works after it’s rolled and used in day to day clinical practice. Usually without any comparator at all. So the Israeli data here is a measure of vaccine effectiveness and you don’t need a placebo cohort for comparison.

What you do need is some other matched cohort, if you’re going to talk about a % effectiveness. Similar to that graph you posted yesterday. Because they don’t get placebo it’s not going to be very accurate (people will behave differently after getting what they believe is a vaccine) but it will provide some context. That’s missing here, so we’re really just going off the fact that they’re experiencing a surge, so 20 cases per 128000 seems reassuringly low. The national average over the last 7 days is 536/100k. Although regional variations will mess up any estimates of effectiveness by doing simple maths on those figures.

EDIT: I’m sure you know all this. Just chatting shit mainly for the benefit of anyone else who’s interested.

Nothing wrong with being pedantic!

In addition if you look at the twitter thread it seems like they haven't even tested all of the 128.000, only people with known exposures or symptoms. So the 99.99% is even more inaccurate.

 

[massi83]

AZ vaccine only 8% effective in over 65s?
Corona-News am Montag: AstraZeneca-Impfstoff laut Bericht bei Risikogruppe kaum wirksam - DER SPIEGEL

Well at least the production delays don’t matter that much anymore!

 

[Pogue Mahone]

AZ vaccine only 8% effective in over 65s?
Corona-News am Montag: AstraZeneca-Impfstoff laut Bericht bei Risikogruppe kaum wirksam - DER SPIEGEL

Dunno what their sources are but they’re predicting that the EMA won’t give a license for use in >65yo because they were so poorly represented in the trials (and evidently didn’t get a great response)

It does fit with how they supposedly got their best efficacy in the half dose/full dose cohort. That cohort were all under 55 (can’t remember exactly, if not all then most?) so it was always a possibility that dose was a red herring and being young the main driver for good efficacy.

Such a fecking mess though. Really poor effort at running a phase III program.

 

[redshaw]

Well at least the production delays don’t matter that much anymore!

Yes possibly.

They'll want it for under 65s though and seems they're furious about delays and want to know where it's been produced and delivered to for potential exporting banning to third countries.

Press statement by Commissioner Kyriakides (europa.eu)
"You know that AstraZeneca's vaccine is currently in the final stages of the approval process with the European Medicines Agency.

If all requirements are met, the European Medicines Agency could recommend market authorisation by the end of this week.

But there is a problem on the supply side.

Last Friday, the company AstraZeneca surprisingly informed the Commission and the European Union Member States that it intends to supply considerably fewer doses in the coming weeks than agreed and announced.

This new schedule is not acceptable to the European Union.

That is why I wrote a letter to the company at the weekend in which I asked important and serious questions.

The European Union has pre-financed the development of the vaccine and the production and wants to see the return.

The European Union wants to know exactly which doses have been produced by AstraZeneca and where exactly so far and if or to whom they have been delivered.

These questions were also discussed today in the joint Steering Board of the Commission and the 27 Member States with AstraZeneca.

The answers of the company have not been satisfactory so far. That's why a second meeting is scheduled for tonight.

The European Union wants the ordered and pre-financed doses to be delivered as soon as possible. And we want our contract to be fully fulfilled.

In addition, the Commission has today proposed to the 27 Member States in the Steering Board that an export transparency mechanism will be put in place as soon as possible.

The European Union has supported the rapid development and production of several vaccines against COVID-19 with a total of €2.7 billion.

We want clarity on transactions and full transparency concerning the export of vaccines from the EU.

In the future, all companies producing vaccines against COVID-19 in the EU will have to provide early notification whenever they want to export vaccines to third countries.
"

 

[massi83]

Yes possibly.

They'll want it for under 65s though and seems they're furious about delays and want to know where it's been produced and delivered to for potential exporting banning to third countries.

Press statement by Commissioner Kyriakides (europa.eu)
"You know that AstraZeneca's vaccine is currently in the final stages of the approval process with the European Medicines Agency.

If all requirements are met, the European Medicines Agency could recommend market authorisation by the end of this week.

But there is a problem on the supply side.

Last Friday, the company AstraZeneca surprisingly informed the Commission and the European Union Member States that it intends to supply considerably fewer doses in the coming weeks than agreed and announced.

This new schedule is not acceptable to the European Union.

That is why I wrote a letter to the company at the weekend in which I asked important and serious questions.

The European Union has pre-financed the development of the vaccine and the production and wants to see the return.

The European Union wants to know exactly which doses have been produced by AstraZeneca and where exactly so far and if or to whom they have been delivered.

These questions were also discussed today in the joint Steering Board of the Commission and the 27 Member States with AstraZeneca.

The answers of the company have not been satisfactory so far. That's why a second meeting is scheduled for tonight.

The European Union wants the ordered and pre-financed doses to be delivered as soon as possible. And we want our contract to be fully fulfilled.

In addition, the Commission has today proposed to the 27 Member States in the Steering Board that an export transparency mechanism will be put in place as soon as possible.

The European Union has supported the rapid development and production of several vaccines against COVID-19 with a total of €2.7 billion.

We want clarity on transactions and full transparency concerning the export of vaccines from the EU.

In the future, all companies producing vaccines against COVID-19 in the EU will have to provide early notification whenever they want to export vaccines to third countries.
"

Yeah obviously. Just a joke. Such shit news that what else is there to say. I am hopeful still that the numbers are not that bad, if they are, how could UK approve it.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Yeah obviously. Just a joke. Such shit news that what else is there to say. I am hopeful still that the numbers are not that bad, if they are, how could UK approve it.

I know, right? In my experience the MHRA are super detail focused and competent. They have to be. That’s their main job description. Seems impossible they could have missed such a gross deficiency in the data.

 

[worldgonemad]

AZ vaccine only 8% effective in over 65s?
Corona-News am Montag: AstraZeneca-Impfstoff laut Bericht bei Risikogruppe kaum wirksam - DER SPIEGEL

@redshaw, I don't suppose you have a link to an English source do you?

 

[carpy]

 

[jojojo]

AZ vaccine only 8% effective in over 65s?
Corona-News am Montag: AstraZeneca-Impfstoff laut Bericht bei Risikogruppe kaum wirksam - DER SPIEGEL

I'd be interested in reading how the number was derived. The AZ Phase3 trial had a lot of flaws and the research report was a confusing read but 8%? Presumably there's been a new dataset released? If so, has anyone got a link?

Back in December when they did their first published results they only had a tiny number of cases in the over 55s trial - just 5 cases included in the original review. The criticism at the time was that they had too few over 55 test subjects/cases to say anything useful on efficacy, and nothing to report in the over 70s other than minimal side-effects and decent immune response measurements.

 

[redshaw]

@redshaw, I don't suppose you have a link to an English source do you?

No sorry, you'll have to use a translate tool or perhaps a German member can give more details. @do.ob

 

[worldgonemad]

No sorry, you'll have to use a translate tool or perhaps a German member can give more details. @do.ob

Thanks for that. I can only imagine numbers of over 65s in the trial were VERY low as a percentage of the total. Otherwise the UKs vaccine program will surely be in complete disarray.
On a personal note, my mam got her 1st jab yesterday ( 71 yrs old with copd)
Hopefully these reports turn out to be exaggerated or inaccurate.

 

[Mickeza]

To call that Bild story irresponsible would be putting it mildly. No named sources. IF true it would bring the Government down. However, considering they only have access to the same trial data we have then I don’t see how they can possibly know. Plus they called it a highly effective vaccine a week ago before 60% of their supply got cut.

 

[Rooney1987]

AZ vaccine only 8% effective in over 65s?
Corona-News am Montag: AstraZeneca-Impfstoff laut Bericht bei Risikogruppe kaum wirksam - DER SPIEGEL

I might be cynical here but it does seem oddly timed that a story about the Oxford vaccine coincided with the fact there is EU supply issues for the Oxford vaccine.

 

[redshaw]

Thanks for that. I can only imagine numbers of over 65s in the trial were VERY low as a percentage of the total. Otherwise the UKs vaccine program will surely be in complete disarray.
On a personal note, my mam got her 1st jab yesterday ( 71 yrs old with copd)
Hopefully these reports turn out to be exaggerated or inaccurate.

I hope so too. Seems at best more data is required and will be surely above that but this report may trying to spin a story on low data.

Still, I remember seeing the data quickly and thinking it's flawed and how would one determine.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Thanks for that. I can only imagine numbers of over 65s in the trial were VERY low as a percentage of the total. Otherwise the UKs vaccine program will surely be in complete disarray.
On a personal note, my mam got her 1st jab yesterday ( 71 yrs old with copd)
Hopefully these reports turn out to be exaggerated or inaccurate.

To call that Bild story irresponsible would be putting it mildly. No named sources. IF true it would bring the Government down. However, considering they only have access to the same trial data we have then I don’t see how they can possibly know. Plus they called it a highly effective vaccine a week ago before 60% of their supply got cut.

Just looking back at the Lancet publication (that’s how exciting my life is these days) Only 418 out of the 11600 subjects in the primary analysis were aged 70+. So was always going to be a stretch to be confident it works in elderly.

Likely that EMA got data cuts that weren’t available at time of MHRA submission. Assuming still very small numbers of >70yo would only take a few cases of covid in the vaccine arm to completely undermine efficacy data submitted in UK. If that’s the case then the MHRA will have to amend Uk license.

Interesting few days ahead!

Should also say, re-reading the Lancet paper reminded me what an absolute fecking shambles it was. I still think/hope it’s a decent vaccine but they made an awful bollix of proving it. On the plus side, there’s more data being generated all the time. So at some point there will be really solid evidence to work through.

 

[Camy89]

I received my first dose last Monday, only had a sore arm for a few days. Irritatingly I was given a hand out explaining my second dose due in 21-28 days. My appointment for dose 2 is the 30th March...

It's likely been done to death in here, but i find it insane the UK can just prolong the interim period on a whim. Pretty sure Pfizer themselves questioned this move. UK government knobs.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

To be fair to everyone involved this is all completely unprecedented in terms of the speed involved. This whole “rolling review” they’re doing means the goalposts move from one analysis to the next. Submission to approval usually 6 months, with all studies closed out beforehand. These approvals have been done with studies still recruiting. Crazy stuff really. But all for the greater good, so (arguably) worth the risk.

 

[worldgonemad]

Just looking back at the Lancet publication (that’s how exciting my life is these days) Only 418 out of the 11600 subjects in the primary analysis were aged 70+. So was always going to be a stretch to be confident it works in elderly.

Likely that EMA got data cuts that weren’t available at time of MHRA submission. Assuming still very small numbers of >70yo would only take a few cases of covid in the vaccine arm to completely undermine efficacy data submitted in UK. If that’s the case then the MHRA will have to amend Uk license.

Interesting few days ahead!

Should also say, re-reading the Lancet paper reminded me what an absolute fecking shambles it was. I still think/hope it’s a decent vaccine but they made an awful bollix of proving it. On the plus side, there’s more data being generated all the time. So at some point there will be really solid evidence to work through.

What happens if it turns out it really does have low effectiveness in over 65s though pogue? Would they then be able to re vaccinate those age groups with the other vaccines?

 

[Dumbstar]

What happens if it turns out it really does have low effectiveness in over 65s though pogue? Would they then be able to re vaccinate those age groups with the other vaccines?

Also what is the proven efficacy for under 60s? If it's 80%+ the AZ vaccine can be started on the younger community earlier? Police, teachers, etc.

 

[Camy89]

What happens if it turns out it really does have low effectiveness in over 65s though pogue? Would they then be able to re vaccinate those age groups with the other vaccines?

I know you didn't ask me, but personally I think this would be unlikely - both for it having a low efficacy in over 65's and using the other vaccines. I have read that they would wish to avoid concomitant vaccines (within a certain time period anyway).

It doesn't make sense in my head that just due to your age, the vaccine should be so significantly less effective. My haematology and oncology patients likely wont be able to mount such a robust response obviously due to being immunosuppressed, but a majority of over 65's don't have a significantly impaired immune system so should be able to respond appropriately.

Like Pogue mentioned, I reckon this has been extrapolated dubiously from the study and made into a headline.

 

[Tibs]

Interesting development re Oxford vaccine. Hopefully bullshit

 

[arnie_ni]

Interesting development re Oxford vaccine. Hopefully bullshit

?