The vaccines | vaxxed boosted unvaxxed? New poll

How's your immunity looking? Had covid - vote twice - vax status and then again for infection status

  • Vaxxed but no booster

  • Boostered

  • Still waiting in queue for first vaccine dose

  • Won't get vaxxed (unless I have to for travel/work etc)

  • Past infection with covid + I've been vaccinated

  • Past infection with covid - I've not been vaccinated

Results are only viewable after voting.
saivet said:
In the UK, when are under 30s going to be offered the vaccine and which brand will be offered? Is any of this known yet?
Click to expand...
Currently they're being offered Moderna/Pfizer, but there's not much of either of those around. Pfizer in particular is being used mostly for second doses, and that will continue through May. My 21 year old niece has been offered the jab (as a carer for her mum) but hasn't been offered an actual timeslot - the website booking system is showing AZ only as a first dose option in this area. She did actually book an AZ appointment, but was told (when she arrived at the site) to go home again, and just keep trying the booking system.

The numbers still say that everyone can have a first jab by the end of July. That's without adding in any new suppliers.

Novavax may finally start contributing in June/July, maybe others (like Curevac or J&J) as well - but until they're approved and the stock is in place no one knows if they'll actually help bring that end July date forward.

There's also the possibility that AZ and J&J may get phased out of the plan which could change the timeline in the other direction.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
How are they going to manage these regional variations? Any plans for internal travel restrictions?
Click to expand...

There is already a process in place to implement restrictions if cases rise, so they probably don't need one for vaccination levels. There is not much difference across the country anyway. Every region gets the same amount of vaccine relative to their population and there is a slightly lower dose per capita rate in the South. Italy publishes data on doses delivered vs. doses administered. Those regions have the doses, they are just not using them.

Politically Italy is very fractured. Any opportunity to complain about other regions or the central government will be taken, even if there's not much backing it up.
 
11101 said:
There is already a process in place to implement restrictions if cases rise, so they probably don't need one for vaccination levels. There is not much difference across the country anyway. Every region gets the same amount of vaccine relative to their population and there is a slightly lower dose per capita rate in the South. Italy publishes data on doses delivered vs. doses administered. Those regions have the doses, they are just not using them.
Click to expand...
Same approach is taken here in Lithuania, while in around 95% of regions vaccine take up is very good, my region is the worst in the country for this and as a result I’ll be able to get the Pfizer vaccine this Saturday despite me being in my 20s and with no underlying health issues.
 
Rajma said:
Same approach is taken here in Lithuania, while in around 95% of regions vaccine take up is very good, my region is the worst in the country for this and as a result I’ll be able to get the Pfizer vaccine this Saturday despite me being in my 20s and with no underlying health issues.
Click to expand...
Is it very good? ECDC website shows only 48% uptake for over 80s.
 
I finally got to book mine (it's a bit ridiculous asthmatics kept getting punted down the list), but it really wasn't smooth sailing booking. For a start, I have a place literally a few hundred yards away from me that I know isn't fully booked nor catering only to special requirements, yet it wouldn't come up as an option. My nearest one had some close times, but very few for follow-ups (I assume due to allowing people to book across places, plus I'm guessing they are being strict with the timings of the second jab?).

So I had to keep clicking on random days and times to finally get both booked at a place 10miles away. I mean I know it's a government website, but it's ridiculously archaic, it doesn't even provide a calendar view so you can easily pick.

I'm glad it's sorted, but it has been rather less organised that I had hoped.
 
saivet said:
In the UK, when are under 30s going to be offered the vaccine and which brand will be offered? Is any of this known yet?
Click to expand...
My son is 22 yrs old and he has been offered the Pfizer in 2 weeks time so have his mates of the same age.
 
Worrying news from the Seychelles. Despite high vaccination rates they've hit a major surge in infections and hospitalisations.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-56992121

They're mostly using Sinopharm, with some AZ. People are starting to chase the details now. In particular have they been hit by one the newer variants, what were the actual dose/infection timings etc, what can we now determine about efficacy (and efficacy timing) from the surge. Plus of course what happens to those taken ill.

At any rate, the results are so different to those in the UK and Israel that it's an important reminder that rushing to "get back to normal" as soon as you've had a jab might not be good for you or your neighbours.
 
jojojo said:
Worrying news from the Seychelles. Despite high vaccination rates they've hit a major surge in infections and hospitalisations.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-56992121

They're mostly using Sinopharm, with some AZ. People are starting to chase the details now. In particular have they been hit by one the newer variants, what were the actual dose/infection timings etc, what can we now determine about efficacy (and efficacy timing) from the surge. Plus of course what happens to those taken ill.

At any rate, the results are so different to those in the UK and Israel that it's an important reminder that rushing to "get back to normal" as soon as you've had a jab might not be good for you or your neighbours.
Click to expand...
Well, if we were to do a back-of-the-envelope calculation (even if pogue thinks it is pointless) it would give vaccine efficacy of 67%. So nothing out of order.

Furthermore, assuming vaccine efficacy of 67%, they would have 40% of the people protected with 60% of the people vaccinated, so very easy to have R well above 1.
 
Last edited:
saivet said:
Interesting, I'm 26 and I've heard nothing yet. I guess different areas will have varying stocks.
Click to expand...
Yes mate, I was quite surprised that they were getting it so soon . I am 54 and still waiting for my 2nd Pfizer jab , had my 1st on 10th April.
 
I wish I could get one. I’m 38 and covid has hit me massively as I suffer with social anxiety, OCD and PTSD. I’ve been told by my doctors and the vaccination centre I need to wait, all the while I have friends chancing it in other places and getting one or getting called when they are significantly younger than I am. I’ve had more time off sick in the last year than I ever have and it’s literally crippling me with fear. I’ve only asked once so I’m not gonna be a pest to get one, I just know it’ll put me more at ease about actually being in public spaces if I do.
 
So far it seems the inactivated virus vaccines aren't performing well against the variants.
 
Gambit said:
So far it seems the inactivated virus vaccines aren't performing well against the variants.
Click to expand...
J&J had solid efficacy against the variants during the trials though. Unless this isn't inactivated?
 
Is it ok to take paracetamol for fever post vaccination?
 
Gambit said:
So far it seems the inactivated virus vaccines aren't performing well against the variants.
Click to expand...

The only vaccines where I’ve seen any concrete evidence for reduced efficacy against variants vs original strain was the viral vectors (AZ and J&J).

The equivalent data wasn’t available for Pfizer/Moderna as they were developed before the variants became widespread. As far as I know the same is true for Sinopharm/Sinovac. Or have you read anything different?
 
Pogue Mahone said:
The only vaccines where I’ve seen any concrete evidence for reduced efficacy against variants vs original strain was the viral vectors (AZ and J&J).

The equivalent data wasn’t available for Pfizer/Moderna as they were developed before the variants became widespread. As far as I know the same is true for Sinopharm/Sinovac. Or have you read anything different?
Click to expand...
Report I saw out of Brazil with regards to the Brazil variant. See if I can find it again.
 
Gambit said:
Report I saw out of Brazil with regards to the Brazil variant. See if I can find it again.
Click to expand...
Just intuitively that seems unlikely, because Brazil has virtually only used Sinovac from January through just a few weeks ago when AZ started to be used. And in that period the hospitalizations and deaths of people 80+ has been down, while total hospitalizations and deaths has been up.
 
11101 said:
I think a lot of this is regional councils messing about. Marche for example currently has 60,000 doses unused - but they say they're running out? Lombardy is running at around 100k per day and doesn't show any signs of slowing down.
Click to expand...
There haven't been any updates on the Marche vaccination page for 8 days.

oates has his second Pfizer on Friday (3 weeks after first one), but I've read today that they're going to increase that interval to 6 weeks, partly to get more first vaccinations done.
 
Sir Matt said:
It's definitely a good step, but I'd imagine the number of companies in the world that can make one of the mRNA vaccines anytime soon is less than 5.
Click to expand...
The J&J vaccine is going to be the global third world standard IMO. I think it’s easier to produce, and the single shot approach is probably the only way to go for rural areas. mRNA will be reserved for younger people who are less at risk and the richer nations who can afford to produce it.
 
Sir Matt said:
It's definitely a good step, but I'd imagine the number of companies in the world that can make one of the mRNA vaccines anytime soon is less than 5.
Click to expand...

Yup. And worst possible scenario is a generic manufacturer “doing a Russia” and rolling out millions of jabs that aren’t of the quality required. That would be an absolute disaster.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Yup. And worst possible scenario is a generic manufacturer “doing a Russia” and rolling out millions of jabs that aren’t of the quality required. That would be an absolute disaster.
Click to expand...

Not that I'm one to jump on Pfizer's side in any argument, but that was one of their reasons for not wanting this to happen (aside from just the money). The NY Times article going step-by-step through the process at Pfizer gives a good idea of how it happens, but opening up the IP isn't going to mean that Pfizer and Moderna transfer their technical knowledge.
 
Traub said:
Interesting that the tweaked vaccine seems to provide better protection than the booster.
Click to expand...

You would probably expect that as the tweaked vaccine targets the changes in the spike protein.

Either way, it looks like we are definitely heading down the route of annual boosters.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily annually forever. The variants have arisen mainly due to the huge number of infections. Coronaviruses mutate more slowly than flu for example. The more we vaccinate the fewer variants we will see so we may need a booster that targets new variants for a year or two but hopefully we will suppress the virus to a degree that removes the need to an annual booster. Of course we don't know for sure how long immunity will last so we may need a booster every 3-5 years for example. That said the vaccine rollout in the US, UK and Israel seems to be very successful so if we can carry on immunising as many people in as many countries things might look very different this time next year.

And if the link that @Pogue Mahone posted ends up bearing fruit things may be better still.

Pogue Mahone said:


First step to the Holy Grail completed. A vaccine that provides immunity against all coronaviruses. Will work against any and all future variants of SARS-COV-2 as well as any nasty new coronaviruses which might be brewing up in a pangolin’s arse in a jungle somewhere.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Traub said:
Interesting that the tweaked vaccine seems to provide better protection than the booster. Either way, it looks like we are definitely heading down the route of annual boosters.
Click to expand...
This is what has us science nerds so geeked about mRNA vaccines. The ability to change the encoded protein “on the fly” is mind blowing and something traditional vaccines just can’t do.
 
entropy said:
Don't worry. It will be temporary. We will be back to denying life-saving vaccines to people in no time.
Click to expand...

Nobody gets denied a vaccine where I live. I'm sure the US and elsewhere that does occur but why would Moderna, Pfiser and AZ throw millions of development dollars at developing a vaccine if they know they won't be able to profit from it in the event they are successful?
 
WI_Red said:
This is what has us science nerds so geeked about mRNA vaccines. The ability to change the encoded protein “on the fly” is mind blowing and something traditional vaccines just can’t do.
Click to expand...

Great isn't it?
 
Wibble said:
The danger is that it removes the motivation to develop a vaccine if then everyone can produce it without the cost of development.
Click to expand...
entropy said:
Don't worry. It will be temporary. We will be back to denying life-saving vaccines to people in no time.
Click to expand...

I agree with both of you. The concept of mRNA vaccines these companies have developed is not ground breaking. mRNA vaccines have been around for a while in the vet world. What they have pioneered is the insane production scale up, as well as the delivery system (basically how the mRNA is stabilized for injection). Each company spent billions rapidly developing these systems, and for that they should be rewarded. The future that mRNA vaccines brings is mind blowing.

So here is where I agree with @Wibble. The production of thousands of different types of mRNA vaccines is child’s play once you set up a facility to make them. Traditional protein and polysaccharide vaccines require very specific set ups to ensure proper protein folding and post translational modifications (ie methylation, acetylation, etc.). Each vaccine is different, so each production line is unique. With mRNA vaccines the only difference between a COVID vaccine and a flu vaccine is the sequence encoded by the mRNA. All you need to do to change this is swap out the primers used during synthesis. So the same production line can make vaccines to pretty much anything. If Pfizer is forced to reveal or give up its patent for the vaccine delivery system they loose the magic sauce.

Now, I also agree with @entropy that for too long vaccinations have been kept out of the poorest nations by sheer cost and greed. This is wrong, not just for COVID, but for all vaccinations.

there needs to be middle ground. Pharma companies need to be incentivized to make these breakthroughs that can potentially revolutionize how we treat infectious diseases, but those treatments must be guaranteed for everyone, not just the wealthiest people and countries. I don’t know what the answer is, but it needs to be found.
 
Wibble said:
Nobody gets denied a vaccine where I live. I'm sure the US and elsewhere that does occur but why would Moderna, Pfiser, and AZ throw millions of development dollars at developing a vaccine if they know they won't be able to profit from it in the event they are successful?
Click to expand...
They are not throwing away anything. These companies got billions in subsidies from the govt here in the US. And they have already generated close to 4 billion through contracts with other countries.
 
Wibble said:
Nobody gets denied a vaccine where I live. I'm sure the US and elsewhere that does occur but why would Moderna, Pfiser and AZ throw millions of development dollars at developing a vaccine if they know they won't be able to profit from it in the event they are successful?
Click to expand...

I don't know so much about Moderna and Pfizer, but an investigation by the Guardian looking into the Oxford/AZ vaccine found that 97% of the research costs were publicly funded. Interestingly this isn't just the cost for researching the vaccine since early 2020, this is the cost of research going back to the early 2000s covering the development of the vaccine technology as well that underpins it as well.

https://www.theguardian.com/science...covid-vaccine-research-was-97-publicly-funded

A quick google search suggests for Pfizer the German government gave 445 million up front to accelerate research while the US committed to buying 100 million doses ($2 Billion) before anyone knew whether it would get FDA approval an committed to buying another 500 million if that approval was given.

I know the Covid vaccine has had a different evolutionary process to most others but the companies here were never taking the huge financial gambles that they'd like us to think.
 
entropy said:
They are not throwing away anything. These companies got billions in subsidies from the govt here in the US. And they have already generated close to 4 billion through contracts with other countries.
Click to expand...

If they get paid, however that is then the incentve remains. Just tearing up their IP removes their ability to earn money from them. Big pharma isn't exactly on my Christmas list but just tearing up IP laws when it suits us is a recipet for disaster. Maybe these huge incentives you talk of should be conditional on free or cheap supply to developing nations via an organisation like the UN or WHO? Whatvere the solution I see a danger in creating a situation where the next pandemic doesn't result in a huge race to develop a vaccine at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.