Yep, it's less than half the price of other vaccines, and can be stored at normal fridge temps. What's not to like?
Well, it's not as effective as the other two. That's really important, and it's not quite clear just how much poorer it is, as the UK approval process doesn't seem to be as open as the ones here. It looks like a one in five chance of failure for the AstraZeneca one vs one in twenty for either Moderna or Pfizer.Yep, it's less than half the price of other vaccines, and can be stored at normal fridge temps. What's not to like?
This is a pretty risky strategy based on very limited data. I hope it works out for them. I don't see the US doing that.The UK is also now is making poeple wait for their second dose of the vaccine, so they can get more people some protection in the first round. It is unknown if this is a good strategy,
You are right, I saw some Dr's opposing this just yesterday. Perhaps they think they can get more doses from the drug companies to give the second shots on time by this tactic? I hope they follow through though, would be good to know if this works for others. It is possible the outcome could be better than the scheduled two shots. If one were fearful of side effects, waiting an extra few weeks for the second dose might be a good idea. I wonder too, if 4 shots spaced out would make less side effects? I know they would not recommend this because they do not have the manpower for this, but I still would like to know.This is a pretty risky strategy based on very limited data. I hope it works out for them. I don't see the US doing that.
The point is that the faster and wider you can roll out the vaccine, even if delaying the second shot means it might be less effective, it should cut the transmission of the virus and allow us out of this perpetual lockdown cycle.You are right, I saw some Dr's opposing this just yesterday. Perhaps they think they can get more doses from the drug companies to give the second shots on time by this tactic? I hope they follow through though, would be good to know if this works for others. It is possible the outcome could be better than the scheduled two shots. If one were fearful of side effects, waiting an extra few weeks for the second dose might be a good idea. I wonder too, if 4 shots spaced out would make less side effects? I know they would not recommend this because they do not have the manpower for this, but I still would like to know.
Yep, it's less than half the price of other vaccines, and can be stored at normal fridge temps. What's not to like?
The problem is we don't know whether the vaccines cut the transmission of the virus at all - that wasn't what was measured in the clinical trials. Yes, given the 95% efficacy of the two-dose Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, it's a pretty good bet that it will inhibit transmission to some extent. But with an unknown lower efficacy coming from only one dose - and with the lower starting efficacy of the AstraZenica vaccine - it's a much riskier bet. What good will a vaccine do if you can't reach herd immunity even with 100% uptake?The point is that the faster and wider you can roll out the vaccine, even if delaying the second shot means it might be less effective, it should cut the transmission of the virus and allow us out of this perpetual lockdown cycle.
Right. We finally agree on something.The problem is we don't know whether the vaccines cut the transmission of the virus at all - that wasn't what was measured in the clinical trials. Yes, given the 95% efficacy of the two-dose Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, it's a pretty good bet that it will inhibit transmission to some extent. But with an unknown lower efficacy coming from only one dose - and with the lower starting efficacy of the AstraZenica vaccine - it's a much riskier bet. What good will a vaccine do if you can't reach herd immunity even with 100% uptake?
I think I'm happier with the current approach here. We can identify the very high-risk populations, and fully vaccinate them. Perhaps once we start to vaccinate the general population we can try reaching them faster. Certainly the people going to week-long raves to celebrate the New Year don't deserve the full shots...
Um.. probably not.Right. We finally agree on something.
As I've said repeatedly, the smart money is that a vaccine with 95% efficacy is going to limit transmission. It's rather hard to see how it wouldn't do this, as it is clearly reducing viral loads. What I was suggesting that using only one dose will reduce the vaccines effectiveness in this regard.We DO NOT KNOW if the taking the vaccine cuts transmission because it wasn't measured.
No, it wasn't. Why don't you learn something about the vaccines you are criticizing? This information is publicly available - I've already provided you the links three times.The efficacy was for 14 days anyway, as I recall.
The idea that people who have been vaccinated will become superspreaders is an antivaxx fantasy, unsupported by any actual evidence. The effects of the two vaccines currently available in the US have been demonstrated to be overwhelmingly beneficial.Those hiding out in the basements a la Joe Biden could still be spreaders once they come out, assuming they are fine because they have been vaccinated.
You don't seem to know much, but there is a wealth of data produced by very large clinical trials of these vaccines. Why don't you take the effort to learn about these results?We just don't know anything yet.
India has approved it's homegrown vaccine, Covaxin, as well as the AstraZenica/Oxford vaccine (called Covishield in India). Covaxin appears to be an inactivated whole virus. Details of the clinical trials have apparently not been made public, which has led to criticism.China approved its Sinopharm vaccine.
China OKs 1st homegrown vaccine as COVID-19 surges globally
Russia's Sputnik-V has also been approved:
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
China's Sinopharm and Sinovac are also inactivated whole virus, which is the standard / old technology for most vaccines.India has approved it's homegrown vaccine, Covaxin, as well as the AstraZenica/Oxford vaccine (called Covishield in India). Covaxin appears to be an inactivated whole virus. Details of the clinical trials have apparently not been made public, which has led to criticism.