☣ Coronavirus ☣

Status
Not open for further replies.
..... interesting opinions, because of my job I have the possibility to get vaccinated with AZ next week, which is very fast for Austria in my age group. But +/- 30% effectiveness is honestly an argument for me to wait until Pfizer is available everywhere on a large scale.... Doesn't that matter to you?

I find it incomprehensible that pfizer's patent protection was not lifted long ago, and that the best vaccine in the world is produced by all companies with a licence.
Get the AZ, off yer head being selective of what vaccine you want.
 
People here are just phoning the booking line and saying they are a carer and getting booked in no problem.
They 'might' get turned away by the vaccinator on the day with paper work but depends on the vaccinator.
Lots of people here have 'skipped the que'
Wtf is wrong with people?
 
How the hell do you film every second of the gig/club/festival you're at?
images
 
If you’re in the Uk, you can book now if you’re 60+ , don’t have to wait to be contacted. Ignore the bit that says 64+, it works for anyone 60+

Been looking for my mum on here for days and only a Hall's Chemist was available(She didn't seem to trust this as she didn't know the place :rolleyes:), finally today the major vaccination places were open so she's now booked in for next friday 👍.

Shame i didn't book in at my doctors as I would have been vaccinated today 😂. Next time they text me i'll take one up 👍
 
The AZ jab has being developed by a University has had more testing and more open published data than the others. Being a University rather than a corporate entity, they are 100% transparent. They haven't tested it much on with older people so they said they didn't know if it would be effective, as they simply didn't have the data. The efficacy of 60 something was based on the results of every test.

I suspect that in time when the same people have had a time to test different jabs in the identical conditions they will come out pretty equal.
 
The AZ jab has being developed by a University has had more testing and more open published data than the others. Being a University rather than a corporate entity, they are 100% transparent. They haven't tested it much on with older people so they said they didn't know if it would be effective, as they simply didn't have the data. The efficacy of 60 something was based on the results of every test.

I suspect that in time when the same people have had a time to test different jabs in the identical conditions they will come out pretty equal.
From what I gather there where 65+ yr olds in the trials, but not enough to be able to say with statistical certainty how well it worked.

However those that where in the study all mounted a robust response & no bad outcomes. Thus UK mhra said on balance it should work in 65+ (educated guess with some evidence). Where as EU country regulators took the lack of statistical definitive evidence to say not to be used in over 65s.

And now we have millions of 65+ having had the AZ vaccine, the data now confirms it's a very effective vaccine (75%+ with just one jab).

But the negative message in Europe is now ingrained and that is a hard thing to undo. Maybe a rebrand? 😬

Also AZ one benefits with 8+ week gap between both doses as it makes it more effective.

Ps: I also suspect some politics in the not to be used in over 65s, as there was massive supply shortage of AZ for EU and perhaps it was a way of reducing initial demand and saving face.

The EU did get a better price for all their vaccines & making the companies liable for any issues people had with the vaccines, but at cost of time.

UK underwrote that to expedite things. (Goes to show if you hire people who work in pharma companies to get vaccine purchases done fast, they know the shortcuts. - UK vaccine task force)
 
Last edited:
From what I gather there where 65+ yr olds in the trials, but not enough to be able to say with statistical certainty how well it worked.

However those that where in the study all mounted a robust response & no bad outcomes. Thus UK mhra said on balance it should work in 65+ (educated guess with some evidence). Where as EU country regulators took the lack of statistical definitive evidence to say not to be used in over 65s.

And now we have millions of 65+ having had the AZ vaccine, the data now confirms it's a very effective vaccine (75%+ with just one jab).

But the negative message in Europe is now ingrained and that is a hard thing to undo. Maybe a rebrand? 😬

Also AZ one benefits with 8+ week gap between both doses as it makes it more effective.

Ps: I also suspect some politics in the not to be used in over 65s, as there was massive supply shortage of AZ for EU and perhaps it was a way of reducing initial demand and saving face.

The EU did get a better price for all their vaccines & making the companies liable for any issues people had with the vaccines, but at cost of time.

UK underwrote that to expedite things. (Goes to show if you hire people who work in pharma companies to get vaccine purchases done fast, they know the shortcuts. - UK vaccine task force)

not everywhere in EU though.

here in spain, the main health guy said from the start that there simply wasn't enough data available just yet that certified the efficiency and no bad outcomes. and that this was the only reason why they were waiting a little more before using it for the elderly people.
 
not everywhere in EU though.

here in spain, the main health guy said from the start that there simply wasn't enough data available just yet that certified the efficiency and no bad outcomes. and that this was the only reason why they were waiting a little more before using it for the elderly people.
Yeah that's fair point, although now EU countries are going to have to run at some pace to get vulnerable vaccinated. Wonder if they'll elect to do the 1 dose wait 12 weeks until 2nd dose soon. Afaik Spain is following the original manufacturer timetable of 3 weeks?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top