The vaccine

[onthemove]

Isn't that an accidental (not tested as such) observation, and therefore no better than anecdotal?

No it was accidentally done, not accidentally observed, and was as tested as other variants. It was unintentional, not anecdotal.

A happy accident. I believe there have been many in the history of science.

As someone has already quoted further up the thread, it seems that more recent data / more sub-analysis of the data is starting to suggest the better efficacy seemingly observed in the LD/SD perhaps wasn't due to the LD/SD regimen, rather that it was potentially due to this LD/SD group being the group that had the longest (average) period between first dose and second dose.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... in-england

"Evidence now suggests that spacing out doses of the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine may be more effective at protecting people. Clinical trials revealed the efficacy of the vaccine was substantially higher, at 90%, in a subgroup of people who received half a dose followed by a full dose, rather than two full doses, which had an efficacy of 62%.
But Prof Wei Shen Lim, the chair of the Covid-19 immunisation group of the JCVI, told MPs further analysis by AstraZeneca showed the improved protection came from spacing out the doses.
“People who had the half dose then full dose were those who were vaccinated at a longer time interval, roughly six to 12 weeks, and what they’ve seen in their data is that people who have the second dose later probably have a three times higher antibody level than those who were vaccinated earlier. So if anything, it suggests that increasing the dose interval is beneficial,” he said.
Sir Mene Pangalos, the executive vice-president of biopharmaceuticals research and development at AstraZeneca, told the committee the first vaccine shot was more protective over time."

[Bouleversee]

No it was accidentally done, not accidentally observed, and was as tested as other variants. It was unintentional, not anecdotal.

A happy accident. I believe there have been many in the history of science.

As someone has already quoted further up the thread, it seems that more recent data / more sub-analysis of the data is starting to suggest the better efficacy seemingly observed in the LD/SD perhaps wasn't due to the LD/SD regimen, rather that it was potentially due to this LD/SD group being the group that had the longest (average) period between first dose and second dose.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... in-england

"Evidence now suggests that spacing out doses of the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine may be more effective at protecting people. Clinical trials revealed the efficacy of the vaccine was substantially higher, at 90%, in a subgroup of people who received half a dose followed by a full dose, rather than two full doses, which had an efficacy of 62%.
But Prof Wei Shen Lim, the chair of the Covid-19 immunisation group of the JCVI, told MPs further analysis by AstraZeneca showed the improved protection came from spacing out the doses.
“People who had the half dose then full dose were those who were vaccinated at a longer time interval, roughly six to 12 weeks, and what they’ve seen in their data is that people who have the second dose later probably have a three times higher antibody level than those who were vaccinated earlier. So if anything, it suggests that increasing the dose interval is beneficial,” he said.
Sir Mene Pangalos, the executive vice-president of biopharmaceuticals research and development at AstraZeneca, told the committee the first vaccine shot was more protective over time."

They were also under 55 which may make a difference. Was the plan always to give the 2nd AZN jab after 12 weeks?

[onthemove]

A happy accident. I believe there have been many in the history of science.

As someone has already quoted further up the thread, it seems that more recent data / more sub-analysis of the data is starting to suggest the better efficacy seemingly observed in the LD/SD perhaps wasn't due to the LD/SD regimen, rather that it was potentially due to this LD/SD group being the group that had the longest (average) period between first dose and second dose.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... in-england

"Evidence now suggests that spacing out doses of the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine may be more effective at protecting people. Clinical trials revealed the efficacy of the vaccine was substantially higher, at 90%, in a subgroup of people who received half a dose followed by a full dose, rather than two full doses, which had an efficacy of 62%.
But Prof Wei Shen Lim, the chair of the Covid-19 immunisation group of the JCVI, told MPs further analysis by AstraZeneca showed the improved protection came from spacing out the doses.
“People who had the half dose then full dose were those who were vaccinated at a longer time interval, roughly six to 12 weeks, and what they’ve seen in their data is that people who have the second dose later probably have a three times higher antibody level than those who were vaccinated earlier. So if anything, it suggests that increasing the dose interval is beneficial,” he said.
Sir Mene Pangalos, the executive vice-president of biopharmaceuticals research and development at AstraZeneca, told the committee the first vaccine shot was more protective over time."

They were also under 55 which may make a difference. Was the plan always to give the 2nd AZN jab after 12 weeks?

I'm currently technically working, so can't spend the time going back to check at the moment, but from what I recall, I think the first ~1000 people were only supposed to receive 1 dose, and it was a protocol change later than changed this.

From what I recall the intention with the second doses was that these should be at 28days (though anyone with time to go back and check please correct me if my recollection is incorrect), but practical issues intervened and virtually none actually ended up receiving their second dose at the intended duration … in any of the groups, although more so for the first LD/SD group..

The upshot was that they ended up with quite a range of time intervals between 1st and 2nd dose.

I suspect it is a combination of analysing all the groups (not just LD/SD) and the efficacy vs time between vaccinations across them all (which the unintended spread of intervals has enabled them to do), that is now leading them to think the time between second dose might be the more significant factor in the better efficacy of the LD/SD group rather than it being the low dose or just down to age.

I'd guess they probably now have a lot more data to go off as well as a result of it now being 2 months since the original data cut off point for the stage 3 results plus the pandemic increasing particularly in London which is one of the areas they conducted the trials. But I'm not aware that they've made any further data public yet(?).

The LD/SD being under 55 may make some difference, but I'd assume from the comments from the JVCI suggest that it is looking specifically like the duration between doses is more likely now the main factor.

(It still raises the question though... if they can get 90% from LD/SD spread over 12 weeks, couldn't this still make the existing vaccine supplies go further, even if it's no better or worse the SD/SD if both given at the same intervals?)

[Bouleversee]

On the move -

My apologies. I should have made my question clearer. I was referring to the intention at the start of our vaccination programme. I know that originally the interval between lst and 2nd doses for the Pfizer jab was 3 weeks (I had an appointment for the 2nd, now cancelled and expected to be around 12 weeks) but when they knew the AZN one had been approved and was ready to roll, was it always going to be at an interval of 12 for that one when the inoculations started in the UK or did they change that as well for the same reason, i.e. in order to give it to more people?

[swill453]

My apologies. I should have made my question clearer. I was referring to the intention at the start of our vaccination programme. I know that originally the interval between lst and 2nd doses for the Pfizer jab was 3 weeks (I had an appointment for the 2nd, now cancelled and expected to be around 12 weeks) but when they knew the AZN one had been approved and was ready to roll, was it always going to be at an interval of 12 for that one when the inoculations started in the UK or did they change that as well for the same reason, i.e. in order to give it to more people?

It's difficult to really know the thought process, but it seemed that intention was to give the 2nd dose of the AstraZeneca one after 3 (or was it 4) weeks. Then Tony Blair expressed an opinion about delaying the 2nd dose so that more people could get the 1st dose quicker. A couple of days later the official position changed. This may have been a coincidence...

Scott.

[stevensfo]

My apologies. I should have made my question clearer. I was referring to the intention at the start of our vaccination programme. I know that originally the interval between lst and 2nd doses for the Pfizer jab was 3 weeks (I had an appointment for the 2nd, now cancelled and expected to be around 12 weeks) but when they knew the AZN one had been approved and was ready to roll, was it always going to be at an interval of 12 for that one when the inoculations started in the UK or did they change that as well for the same reason, i.e. in order to give it to more people?

It's difficult to really know the thought process, but it seemed that intention was to give the 2nd dose of the AstraZeneca one after 3 (or was it 4) weeks. Then Tony Blair expressed an opinion about delaying the 2nd dose so that more people could get the 1st dose quicker. A couple of days later the official position changed. This may have been a coincidence...

Scott.

A quick look at my vaccination booklet shows that I received my two Diptheria/Tetanus vaccines exactly one month apart, whereas my two Hepatitis A vaccines were given six months apart. This was prior to spending a month in Tanzania. I can't remember the details and I think that the Hepatitis vaccine may even have been given after my return.

The first vaccine is given to prepare the B-cells to produce antibodies. You then need a booster to make them produce a lot more. The second vaccination is the most important! These cells are being generated all the time, so waiting too long between doses is like not giving the vaccine at all.

Steve

[funduffer]

On the move -

My apologies. I should have made my question clearer. I was referring to the intention at the start of our vaccination programme. I know that originally the interval between lst and 2nd doses for the Pfizer jab was 3 weeks (I had an appointment for the 2nd, now cancelled and expected to be around 12 weeks) but when they knew the AZN one had been approved and was ready to roll, was it always going to be at an interval of 12 for that one when the inoculations started in the UK or did they change that as well for the same reason, i.e. in order to give it to more people?

It was done to vaccinate as many vulnerable people as possible in the shortest possible time, thus saving lives.

[Lootman]

My apologies. I should have made my question clearer. I was referring to the intention at the start of our vaccination programme. I know that originally the interval between lst and 2nd doses for the Pfizer jab was 3 weeks (I had an appointment for the 2nd, now cancelled and expected to be around 12 weeks) but when they knew the AZN one had been approved and was ready to roll, was it always going to be at an interval of 12 for that one when the inoculations started in the UK or did they change that as well for the same reason, i.e. in order to give it to more people?

It's difficult to really know the thought process, but it seemed that intention was to give the 2nd dose of the AstraZeneca one after 3 (or was it 4) weeks. Then Tony Blair expressed an opinion about delaying the 2nd dose so that more people could get the 1st dose quicker. A couple of days later the official position changed. This may have been a coincidence...

I think Pfizer indicated 3 weeks between jabs and the others were 4 weeks. Can't imagine a few days making much difference, but 12 weeks certainly could.

The JNJ vaccine in stage 3 trials requires only one jab and that looks promising, especially as JNJ has a very high production capacity.

California is beginning vaccinations to anyone over 65 next week. I qualify but am not sure I want to stick around 3/4 weeks for the second one. On the other hand in the UK I am group 5 and so would not get my jabs until March and June. Plus I'd prefer to not have the AZN jab so it's a tough decision.

[Bouleversee]

On the move -

My apologies. I should have made my question clearer. I was referring to the intention at the start of our vaccination programme. I know that originally the interval between lst and 2nd doses for the Pfizer jab was 3 weeks (I had an appointment for the 2nd, now cancelled and expected to be around 12 weeks) but when they knew the AZN one had been approved and was ready to roll, was it always going to be at an interval of 12 for that one when the inoculations started in the UK or did they change that as well for the same reason, i.e. in order to give it to more people?

It was done to vaccinate as many vulnerable people as possible in the shortest possible time, thus saving lives.

Yes. Why else would you want to give it to more people?

[dealtn]

My apologies. I should have made my question clearer. I was referring to the intention at the start of our vaccination programme. I know that originally the interval between lst and 2nd doses for the Pfizer jab was 3 weeks (I had an appointment for the 2nd, now cancelled and expected to be around 12 weeks) but when they knew the AZN one had been approved and was ready to roll, was it always going to be at an interval of 12 for that one when the inoculations started in the UK or did they change that as well for the same reason, i.e. in order to give it to more people?

It's difficult to really know the thought process, but it seemed that intention was to give the 2nd dose of the AstraZeneca one after 3 (or was it 4) weeks. Then Tony Blair expressed an opinion about delaying the 2nd dose so that more people could get the 1st dose quicker. A couple of days later the official position changed. This may have been a coincidence...

Scott.

A quick look at my vaccination booklet shows that I received my two Diptheria/Tetanus vaccines exactly one month apart, whereas my two Hepatitis A vaccines were given six months apart. This was prior to spending a month in Tanzania. I can't remember the details and I think that the Hepatitis vaccine may even have been given after my return.

The first vaccine is given to prepare the B-cells to produce antibodies. You then need a booster to make them produce a lot more. The second vaccination is the most important! These cells are being generated all the time, so waiting too long between doses is like not giving the vaccine at all.

Steve

Not sure I completely agree it's like not giving the vaccine at all - after all there is an amount of protection from the first dose. But you are right there will be an efficient and appropriate period between the doses. Just like with your Diptheria/Tetanus and Hepatitis examples that appropriate period won't be the same.

It is unlikely the most appropriate period is 21 days, that is just what was officially tested. It could be for some vaccines the 12 weeks is closer, or indeed an even longer interval. Regardless the considerations are about population immunity not just individual immunity (even though understandably many of us will be primarily concerned with the latter).

[Bouleversee]

Lootman said:

"California is beginning vaccinations to anyone over 65 next week. I qualify but am not sure I want to stick around 3/4 weeks for the second one. On the other hand in the UK I am group 5 and so would not get my jabs until March and June. Plus I'd prefer to not have the AZN jab so it's a tough decision."

My friend lives in El Macero, nr Sacramento I believe, and she says she has just received a letter from her University Hospital saying they will shortly be starting to vaccinate the over 75s and she will be getting a letter of invitation, so like here, it depends where you are living in California and the local centre doing the jabs..

[redsturgeon]

Mrs RS received her vaccine this morning. She was chatting to the GP who administered it. It was the Pfizer one, she was saying they were managing to get 6 rather than 5 doses out of each vial. She also said that the reverse was the case with the AZ vaccine and they were getting two or three fewer doses out out each vial than the recommended level. Interesting?

John

[Mike4]

Mrs RS received her vaccine this morning. She was chatting to the GP who administered it. It was the Pfizer one, she was saying they were managing to get 6 rather than 5 doses out of each vial. She also said that the reverse was the case with the AZ vaccine and they were getting two or three fewer doses out out each vial than the recommended level. Interesting?

John

Two or three fewer?!

How many doses are supposed to be in one AZ vial then? Presumably a lot more than five.

[redsturgeon]

Mrs RS received her vaccine this morning. She was chatting to the GP who administered it. It was the Pfizer one, she was saying they were managing to get 6 rather than 5 doses out of each vial. She also said that the reverse was the case with the AZ vaccine and they were getting two or three fewer doses out out each vial than the recommended level. Interesting?

John

Two or three fewer?!

How many doses are supposed to be in one AZ vial then? Presumably a lot more than five.

This is the official line (Scotland but same applies to England)

https://www.sehd.scot.nhs.uk/publicatio ... Zenica.pdf

Either 8 or 10 doses.

John

[redsturgeon]

Here is the very comprehensive data sheet on the AZ vaccine

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... reg174.pdf

I can see how the GP talking to Mrs RS this morning may be confused. I would bet that she was using an 8 dose vial thinking they were 10 dose.

John

[staffordian]

This is the official line (Scotland but same applies to England)

https://www.sehd.scot.nhs.uk/publicatio ... Zenica.pdf

Either 8 or 10 doses.

John

Is it just me, or is this note badly written and confusing? (Though the gist is pretty clear)

[redsturgeon]

Useful info from "The Green Book", chapter on Covid and vaccines

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... 14a_v4.pdf

John

[Lootman]

Lootman said:

"California is beginning vaccinations to anyone over 65 next week. I qualify but am not sure I want to stick around 3/4 weeks for the second one. On the other hand in the UK I am group 5 and so would not get my jabs until March and June. Plus I'd prefer to not have the AZN jab so it's a tough decision."

My friend lives in El Macero, nr Sacramento I believe, and she says she has just received a letter from her University Hospital saying they will shortly be starting to vaccinate the over 75s and she will be getting a letter of invitation, so like here, it depends where you are living in California and the local centre doing the jabs..

Yes I believe it varies by county. I now have a number to call although I got bored with being on hold. I heard someone was on hold for 4 hours and was then told to call another number!

We are going to see a doctor at a University hospital next week so will sound him out.

[Bouleversee]

Apparently the Brazilian variant is already in the UK, according to Medical News Today:

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articl ... e74a4f1c#2

[redsturgeon]

Apparently the Brazilian variant is already in the UK, according to Medical News Today:

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articl ... e74a4f1c#2

Ah but it is not THE Brazilian variant but another one.

John