Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Mainboard' started by TrustyPatches, Mar 15, 2020.
The goddamn Dutch that’s how
Reagan was right. Marijuana kills.
NEJM, JAMA and BMJ rejected it. Annals is usually really good. It definitely gets attention and eye balls on your journal.
It's good to know from an epidemiology stand point that masks probably don't do any good when local cases are low and community spread is minimal, and this is good data supporting that.
OF COURSE, it will be misinterpreted by chuds who are scientifically illiterate, but it's still a relevant data point in this specific regard. (although it's a shitty data point of a low quality study).
Got injected around 10:00 am. Knew by 6:00 pm something wasn’t right. Was pretty miserable by 12:00 midnight and had the fever of 101.4, really bad chills, bad headache. Slept like a rock until around 10:00 the next day - woke up with symptoms but felt slightly better than the night before. More fatigue than anything that day. Took another nap that afternoon and woke up feeling decent. Woke up the next morning feeling 100% minus the arm hurting/swollen.
So we’re gonna have to get this vaccine on a Friday or take a sick day? Or any chance of these side effects being reduced?
I look forward to having a weekend ruined or having to take a sick day to get a vaccine
You mean like this? Fuck Clay Travis.
Yea what a bummer that would be
it stops the spread, not the infection
I know! I just said that!
sorry just trying to clearly the annoying bullshit these people are saying, when the say it’s not effective
pperc can correct me if I’m wrong
I’m getting the vaccine, was just asking
Oh, I know. I was going off the earlier post about the Dutch study and how morons would try to use it to fit their narrative. RonBurgundy called it.
Why does everyone keep saying Dutch?
the MOA of masks doesn't change based on the level of community spread. they work just as well, no worse no better. are they an expensive, difficult intervention? not particularly. i don't see the real world value in this data whatsoever.
RonBurgundy explained why this study is garbage on the prior page. it doesn't show anything.
Here is a very good editorial response to this study which explains why it’s not a good study in case anyone needs it.
Able to get us passed the pay wall?
LONDON—A Covid-19 vaccine being developed by the University of Oxford and AstraZenecaAZN -1.76% PLC showed promising immune responses in elderly and older adults, with fewer serious side effects than in younger volunteers, according to a just-published interim analysis previewed in late October.
The data from that preview have now been peer reviewed. The results were published Thursday in the Lancet medical journal, providing a stamp of approval for the earlier findings. The data were based on earlier, Phase Two human trials of the vaccine.
AstraZeneca and Oxford have yet to release later-stage, or Phase Three, trial data demonstrating the vaccine’s overall efficacy in fighting Covid-19. Those trials continue.
THE VACCINE RACE
Moderna and Pfizer Are Reinventing Vaccines, Starting With Covid
Covid-19 Vaccines: What’s Coming and When?
Developing Nations Push for Covid-19 Vaccines Without the Patents
Coronavirus: The Latest Updates
Drugmakers of two rival vaccine candidates—one from Pfizer Inc. and Germany’s BioNTech SE and another from Moderna Inc. —have each disclosed efficacy rates of more than 90%, higher than many had expected from vaccines developed so quickly. The vaccines’ full safety data hasn’t yet been published.
Notes on the News
The news of the week in context, with Tyler Blint-Welsh.
People involved in the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine have said they expect their efficacy data, from ongoing late-stage trials, in the coming weeks. Unlike the Pfizer and Moderna programs, which rely on a new vaccine technology called messenger RNA, the vaccine developed by AstraZeneca and Oxford represents a more traditional approach.
AstraZeneca has committed to making the vaccine at greater volumes across a wider geographic footprint than its Western peers. It has also promised to deliver doses at no profit during the pandemic, and continuing afterward for poorer countries. All that has heightened anticipation of clinical results for the AstraZeneca vaccine, with hopes it can complement rollouts of other shots in parts of the world that might not have immediate access to Pfizer’s and Moderna’s shots.
The Critical Coronavirus-Busting Therapies, Explained
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
0:00 / 7:48
The Critical Coronavirus-Busting Therapies, Explained
Health experts say having a vaccine is just one front in a two-front battle against Covid-19. The other is effective treatments for those who are already sick with the disease. WSJ breaks down the three most promising types in development. Photo Illustration: Jacob Reynolds/WSJ.
The data describing the vaccine’s effect on older people has also taken on outsize importance, since this group is especially vulnerable to serious illness or death from the virus.
In the peer-reviewed study of the vaccine, healthy adults aged 56 and older showed similar positive immune responses to younger trial participants. The oldest adults involved—with an average age of 73-74 years—showed milder adverse reactions, according to early results published Thursday.
Governments are expected to give priority to older adults in rollouts of vaccines, which could start in limited quantities before the end of this year. Scientists have said they expect different age groups to react differently to different vaccines—a big reason why they expect multiple vaccines to be necessary to protect all ages in the coming months and years.
Coronavirus Daily Briefing and Health Weekly
Get an early-morning briefing about the coronavirus each weekday and a weekly Health newsletter when the crisis abates.
The Oxford vaccine spurred trial participants’ immune systems to find and attack cells infected with the virus, and following a second, booster shot was effective in attacking the virus in the bloodstream, according to the interim results. Those positive outcomes were present in all age groups given low and standard doses. Some participants received just one shot, while others got a booster after 28 days. The early-stage study involved 560 healthy adults, including 240 people older than 70 years. Most were white nonsmokers.
The continuing late-stage trials of the vaccine will show broader results for safety and efficacy, including in older adults with underlying health conditions, and from a wider range of backgrounds, countries and ethnicities of all ages, researchers said.
“Immune responses from vaccines are often lessened in older adults because the immune system gradually deteriorates with age, which also leaves older adults more susceptible to infections,” said Andrew Pollard, an Oxford professor who is the lead author of the study.
The most common side effects were pain at the injection site, fatigue, headache, feverishness and muscle pain. Fewer people aged 70 or over experienced those temporary symptoms, compared with younger trial participants, researchers said.
You would find a way to complain about a blowjob.
What did you disagree with in my post sweetie? Use your words
I’ll camp out for the vaccine like it’s Ozzfest tickets during my youth.
You complain about eight months of constant anxiety of catching covid, then when a solution is offered you complain that it's inconvenient. It's fucking nauseating.
Well first off you're misunderstanding my point. That's me complaining about work. That's not me complaining about the vaccine.
I still have no idea what I've done to you that makes you follow me around in this weird fashion
Well, you and I happen to populate some of the same threads. Some times I comment on your posts and other times I don't.
Furthermore, constant negativity is an unattractive trait in people. HTH.
Then maybe stop quoting me complaining all the time. Irony is dead
BBC article, no paywall
That's what they'll want you to do.
You know most people are gonna be all YOLO once they get that first shot.
Why does it have to be 2 shots/how does that work? Explain that to a dumb person pls
From the CDC:
Vaccines Require More Than One Dose
There are four reasons that babies—and even teens or adults—who receive a vaccine for the first time may need more than one dose:
• For some vaccines (primarily inactivated vaccines), the first dose does not provide as much immunity as possible. So, more than one dose is needed to build more complete immunity. The vaccine that protects against the bacteria Hib, which causes meningitis, is a good example.
• For some vaccines, after a while, immunity begins to wear off. At that point, a “booster” dose is needed to bring immunity levels back up. This booster dose usually occurs several years after the initial series of vaccine doses is given. For example, in the case of the DTaP vaccine, which protects against diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis, the initial series of four shots that children receive as part of their infant immunizations helps build immunity. But a booster dose is needed at 4 years through 6 years old. Another booster against these diseases is needed at 11 years or 12 years of age. This booster for older children—and teens and adults, too—is called Tdap.
• For some vaccines (primarily live vaccines), studies have shown that more than one dose is needed for everyone to develop the best immune response. For example, after one dose of the MMR vaccine, some people may not develop enough antibodies to fight off infection. The second dose helps make sure that almost everyone is protected.
• Finally, in the case of flu vaccines, adults and children (6 months and older) need to get a dose every year. Children 6 months through 8 years old who have never gotten a flu vaccine in the past or have only gotten one dose in past years need two doses the first year they are vaccinated. Then, an annual flu vaccine is needed because the flu viruses causing disease may be different from season to season. Every year, flu vaccines are made to protect against the viruses that research suggests will be most common. Also, the immunity a child gets from a flu vaccination wears off over time. Getting a flu vaccine every year helps keep a child protected, even if the vaccine viruses don’t change from one season to the next.
People are YOLO without a vaccine existing.
You may think it's YOLO now but once the masses get a hint of that sweet, sweet vaccine in their blood streams oh boy!!! Parties errrrywhere!
Im not 100% sure if I possibly got a stronger/experimental dose or not. I had patients that night and figured out of caution I should probably go home, but up until that point I was able to work, just feeling kind of miserable. I could have powered through had I needed to. I wouldn’t want to go to work the next day if I didn’t need to though.
What was the most recent mask efficacy study posted ITT need for reasons
danish study says masks don’t keep you from getting sick. Didn’t test efficacy of spreading
One before that ITT
This is a month and a half ago...
This dude is keeping a running List in reverse chronological order iirc, not sure when last updated
Apologies if I’ve missed it in the thread but has there been any studies on self-administered nasal swab false negatives?
Similar results to normal nasal swabs
More good news
Two different dosing regimens demonstrated efficacy with one showing a better profile
No hospitalisations or severe cases of COVID-19 in participants treated with AZD1222
Positive high-level results from an interim analysis of clinical trials of AZD1222 in the UK and Brazil showed the vaccine was highly effective in preventing COVID-19, the primary endpoint, and no hospitalisations or severe cases of the disease were reported in participants receiving the vaccine. There were a total of 131 COVID-19 cases in the interim analysis.
One dosing regimen (n=2,741) showed vaccine efficacy of 90% when AZD1222 was given as a half dose, followed by a full dose at least one month apart, and another dosing regimen (n=8,895) showed 62% efficacy when given as two full doses at least one month apart. The combined analysis from both dosing regimens (n=11,636) resulted in an average efficacy of 70%. All results were statistically significant (p<=0.0001). More data will continue to accumulate and additional analysis will be conducted, refining the efficacy reading and establishing the duration of protection.
Any theory on the half dose? Seems weird
Anyway, this will be the gamechanger for this to go global and should lead to mass vaccination by the end of Q1 in the West at least.
Ok so this started as an argument with a family member and now I am just genuinely curious. Is this operation warp speed thing Trump is hanging his hat on anything more than a purchasing agreement? Does the federal government typically provided funding for these types of things? What actual barriers to development have been removed here? Not trying to start some major political shitstorm in here I am more curious about how the behind the scenes on how this stuff typically would go. I know this is a bit unprecedented but I thought I would ask. Don't expect some dissertation but if anyone has any helpful links I can read I would appreciate it.
It’s more than a purchasing agreement. It’s fairly standard for labs receive government funding for vaccine development, though amount allocated for OWS is generous. The government worked with the drug companies to standardize their protocols for efficiency of trial oversight. The government is footing the bill for large scale production, before trial results/approval are known. Finally, the government is assisting with distribution to expedite delivery to all 50 states.
however pfsizer was not part of the operation correct?