The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.

Updates on [SARS2/covid-19] (reboot)

13032343536

Posts

  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Corvus wrote: »
    chrisnl wrote: »
    I was under the impression that there were a bunch of doses of the AZ vaccine in US warehouses ready to go? At the very least production has certainly already started since I think over 40 countries have been using that particular one already.

    About 30 million of them I believe. Some of which are or already have been sent to Mexico and Canada

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-mexico/us-to-share-4-million-doses-of-astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine-with-mexico-canada-idUSKBN2BA22S

    30 million was the number quoted for inventory about a month ago. It's probably more by now.

    Honestly we should just either approve the damn things or give them to Canada and Mexico.

    U.S. Health Officials Question AstraZeneca Vaccine Trial Results https://nyti.ms/3vP3DNj

    The 'scandal' such as it is seems to be that the review board wanted some undetermined cases analyzed and included and they think that with those cases baked in the effacacy is between 69 and 74 %. Astra Zeneca disagrees and thinks the new cases hold the efficacy constant.

    Foolish for AZ to rush to publish, foolish for the board to continue eroding trust in a vaccine the world desperately needs with vague public statements. Their criticism should have included exactly what they thought the efficacy was (which is still excellent).

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    Mayabird wrote: »
    In other "this virus is weird" news, MMR also offers some protection against COVID-19. Specifically, one of the Ms - having antibodies against mumps..
    The significance of our study is that it showed that mumps titers related to the MMR II vaccine are significantly and inversely correlated with the severity of COVID-19-related symptoms, supporting the theorized association between the MMR vaccine and COVID-19 severity.

    Okay, admittedly it also worked if someone had a case of mumps and still had antibodies, but mumps is also the one of the three in MMR that loses its oomph fastest and most commonly so it's the one that needs to be boosted the most. I had to get it a booster a few years ago for that reason, in fact. Some of that "kids don't get COVID as bad" stuff may be because kids would have more recently gotten the MMR vaccine and would still have protection against mumps.

    It's not entirely uncommon for one vaccine to provide some protection against something completely different - the meningitis vaccine also gives partial protection against gonorrhea, for instance. I don't know virology well enough to know how closely the functions of the mumps virus map to coronaviruses, but I do suspect that antivaxxers have been doing double-disservice to their kids here.

    Actually, just getting mumps didn't seem to be protective

    "Since the presence of high mumps titers did not indicate a level of protection from COVID-19 in those who have not had the MMR II vaccine, if MMR II is given in a trial to evaluate possible protection against COVID-19, it should be given regardless of mumps titer or other MMR titer seropositivity, particularly in older adults."

    You have to have mumps antibodies which arise from the MMR II vaccine.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    Wasn't that something we suspected for a while? I remember germany having gotten an "older style" of MMR vaccine for longer (as in, 1990s), and there being speculation that this might have lead to a somewhat lower mortality rate in the beginning of the pandemic

    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
  • zagdrobzagdrob Registered User regular
    edited March 2021
    N/m, not general discussion thread.

    zagdrob on
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    Wasn't that something we suspected for a while? I remember germany having gotten an "older style" of MMR vaccine for longer (as in, 1990s), and there being speculation that this might have lead to a somewhat lower mortality rate in the beginning of the pandemic

    Yes, there were papers published earlier discussing how the mumps antibodies you get from MMR tend to have a more cross neutralizing effect against measles, and a suggestion that these odd mumps antibodies might be why kids have such a low incidence rate which then shoots up around 14. Unfortunately it was all vaguely pre print stuff so I can’t find it to link it.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • evilmrhenryevilmrhenry Registered User regular
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    In other "this virus is weird" news, MMR also offers some protection against COVID-19. Specifically, one of the Ms - having antibodies against mumps..
    The significance of our study is that it showed that mumps titers related to the MMR II vaccine are significantly and inversely correlated with the severity of COVID-19-related symptoms, supporting the theorized association between the MMR vaccine and COVID-19 severity.

    Okay, admittedly it also worked if someone had a case of mumps and still had antibodies, but mumps is also the one of the three in MMR that loses its oomph fastest and most commonly so it's the one that needs to be boosted the most. I had to get it a booster a few years ago for that reason, in fact. Some of that "kids don't get COVID as bad" stuff may be because kids would have more recently gotten the MMR vaccine and would still have protection against mumps.

    It's not entirely uncommon for one vaccine to provide some protection against something completely different - the meningitis vaccine also gives partial protection against gonorrhea, for instance. I don't know virology well enough to know how closely the functions of the mumps virus map to coronaviruses, but I do suspect that antivaxxers have been doing double-disservice to their kids here.

    Actually, just getting mumps didn't seem to be protective

    "Since the presence of high mumps titers did not indicate a level of protection from COVID-19 in those who have not had the MMR II vaccine, if MMR II is given in a trial to evaluate possible protection against COVID-19, it should be given regardless of mumps titer or other MMR titer seropositivity, particularly in older adults."

    You have to have mumps antibodies which arise from the MMR II vaccine.

    The really good news here is that now it's at least theoretically possible to reopen schools in a safe manner. The whole "kids just don't get it for some reason" bit was really weird, but now we know what's protecting them, and can ensure that everyone actually has protection before they go back, providing boosters as necessary. Getting approval for the vaccine in the under-12 age range was going to take a really long time, but the MMR vaccine is already approved for them. (For adults, I'm not sure we have enough stock of that vaccine to matter, and I'm not sure if there's a point in producing it instead of the actual COVID vaccine, but for kids it's a good deal.)

  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    In other "this virus is weird" news, MMR also offers some protection against COVID-19. Specifically, one of the Ms - having antibodies against mumps..
    The significance of our study is that it showed that mumps titers related to the MMR II vaccine are significantly and inversely correlated with the severity of COVID-19-related symptoms, supporting the theorized association between the MMR vaccine and COVID-19 severity.

    Okay, admittedly it also worked if someone had a case of mumps and still had antibodies, but mumps is also the one of the three in MMR that loses its oomph fastest and most commonly so it's the one that needs to be boosted the most. I had to get it a booster a few years ago for that reason, in fact. Some of that "kids don't get COVID as bad" stuff may be because kids would have more recently gotten the MMR vaccine and would still have protection against mumps.

    It's not entirely uncommon for one vaccine to provide some protection against something completely different - the meningitis vaccine also gives partial protection against gonorrhea, for instance. I don't know virology well enough to know how closely the functions of the mumps virus map to coronaviruses, but I do suspect that antivaxxers have been doing double-disservice to their kids here.

    Actually, just getting mumps didn't seem to be protective

    "Since the presence of high mumps titers did not indicate a level of protection from COVID-19 in those who have not had the MMR II vaccine, if MMR II is given in a trial to evaluate possible protection against COVID-19, it should be given regardless of mumps titer or other MMR titer seropositivity, particularly in older adults."

    You have to have mumps antibodies which arise from the MMR II vaccine.

    The really good news here is that now it's at least theoretically possible to reopen schools in a safe manner. The whole "kids just don't get it for some reason" bit was really weird, but now we know what's protecting them, and can ensure that everyone actually has protection before they go back, providing boosters as necessary. Getting approval for the vaccine in the under-12 age range was going to take a really long time, but the MMR vaccine is already approved for them. (For adults, I'm not sure we have enough stock of that vaccine to matter, and I'm not sure if there's a point in producing it instead of the actual COVID vaccine, but for kids it's a good deal.)

    Why doesn't it affect kids? I'm currently mulling the decision to send my child back to in-person school so I'd like to know if there's a scientific basis for that or if it is just one of those rumors going round.

  • BrodyBrody The Watch The First ShoreRegistered User regular
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    In other "this virus is weird" news, MMR also offers some protection against COVID-19. Specifically, one of the Ms - having antibodies against mumps..
    The significance of our study is that it showed that mumps titers related to the MMR II vaccine are significantly and inversely correlated with the severity of COVID-19-related symptoms, supporting the theorized association between the MMR vaccine and COVID-19 severity.

    Okay, admittedly it also worked if someone had a case of mumps and still had antibodies, but mumps is also the one of the three in MMR that loses its oomph fastest and most commonly so it's the one that needs to be boosted the most. I had to get it a booster a few years ago for that reason, in fact. Some of that "kids don't get COVID as bad" stuff may be because kids would have more recently gotten the MMR vaccine and would still have protection against mumps.

    It's not entirely uncommon for one vaccine to provide some protection against something completely different - the meningitis vaccine also gives partial protection against gonorrhea, for instance. I don't know virology well enough to know how closely the functions of the mumps virus map to coronaviruses, but I do suspect that antivaxxers have been doing double-disservice to their kids here.

    Actually, just getting mumps didn't seem to be protective

    "Since the presence of high mumps titers did not indicate a level of protection from COVID-19 in those who have not had the MMR II vaccine, if MMR II is given in a trial to evaluate possible protection against COVID-19, it should be given regardless of mumps titer or other MMR titer seropositivity, particularly in older adults."

    You have to have mumps antibodies which arise from the MMR II vaccine.

    The really good news here is that now it's at least theoretically possible to reopen schools in a safe manner. The whole "kids just don't get it for some reason" bit was really weird, but now we know what's protecting them, and can ensure that everyone actually has protection before they go back, providing boosters as necessary. Getting approval for the vaccine in the under-12 age range was going to take a really long time, but the MMR vaccine is already approved for them. (For adults, I'm not sure we have enough stock of that vaccine to matter, and I'm not sure if there's a point in producing it instead of the actual COVID vaccine, but for kids it's a good deal.)

    Why doesn't it affect kids? I'm currently mulling the decision to send my child back to in-person school so I'd like to know if there's a scientific basis for that or if it is just one of those rumors going round.

    I think it was a study of 80 people, so I'm not sure it could be said to actually prove anything. It just suggests that the reason why kids don't seem to suffer many symptoms from COVID (it doesn't seem to imply they can't get it, just its significantly less severe) is due to having recently received the mumps vaccine.

    "I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."

    The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson

    Steam: Korvalain
  • zepherinzepherin Russian warship, go fuck yourself Registered User regular
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    In other "this virus is weird" news, MMR also offers some protection against COVID-19. Specifically, one of the Ms - having antibodies against mumps..
    The significance of our study is that it showed that mumps titers related to the MMR II vaccine are significantly and inversely correlated with the severity of COVID-19-related symptoms, supporting the theorized association between the MMR vaccine and COVID-19 severity.

    Okay, admittedly it also worked if someone had a case of mumps and still had antibodies, but mumps is also the one of the three in MMR that loses its oomph fastest and most commonly so it's the one that needs to be boosted the most. I had to get it a booster a few years ago for that reason, in fact. Some of that "kids don't get COVID as bad" stuff may be because kids would have more recently gotten the MMR vaccine and would still have protection against mumps.

    It's not entirely uncommon for one vaccine to provide some protection against something completely different - the meningitis vaccine also gives partial protection against gonorrhea, for instance. I don't know virology well enough to know how closely the functions of the mumps virus map to coronaviruses, but I do suspect that antivaxxers have been doing double-disservice to their kids here.

    Actually, just getting mumps didn't seem to be protective

    "Since the presence of high mumps titers did not indicate a level of protection from COVID-19 in those who have not had the MMR II vaccine, if MMR II is given in a trial to evaluate possible protection against COVID-19, it should be given regardless of mumps titer or other MMR titer seropositivity, particularly in older adults."

    You have to have mumps antibodies which arise from the MMR II vaccine.
    ...I don't even care if this has dubious science, and is effectively bullshit. I am ok with this spreading and parents panicking and getting their kids their MMR vaccines.

  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    Brody wrote: »
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    In other "this virus is weird" news, MMR also offers some protection against COVID-19. Specifically, one of the Ms - having antibodies against mumps..
    The significance of our study is that it showed that mumps titers related to the MMR II vaccine are significantly and inversely correlated with the severity of COVID-19-related symptoms, supporting the theorized association between the MMR vaccine and COVID-19 severity.

    Okay, admittedly it also worked if someone had a case of mumps and still had antibodies, but mumps is also the one of the three in MMR that loses its oomph fastest and most commonly so it's the one that needs to be boosted the most. I had to get it a booster a few years ago for that reason, in fact. Some of that "kids don't get COVID as bad" stuff may be because kids would have more recently gotten the MMR vaccine and would still have protection against mumps.

    It's not entirely uncommon for one vaccine to provide some protection against something completely different - the meningitis vaccine also gives partial protection against gonorrhea, for instance. I don't know virology well enough to know how closely the functions of the mumps virus map to coronaviruses, but I do suspect that antivaxxers have been doing double-disservice to their kids here.

    Actually, just getting mumps didn't seem to be protective

    "Since the presence of high mumps titers did not indicate a level of protection from COVID-19 in those who have not had the MMR II vaccine, if MMR II is given in a trial to evaluate possible protection against COVID-19, it should be given regardless of mumps titer or other MMR titer seropositivity, particularly in older adults."

    You have to have mumps antibodies which arise from the MMR II vaccine.

    The really good news here is that now it's at least theoretically possible to reopen schools in a safe manner. The whole "kids just don't get it for some reason" bit was really weird, but now we know what's protecting them, and can ensure that everyone actually has protection before they go back, providing boosters as necessary. Getting approval for the vaccine in the under-12 age range was going to take a really long time, but the MMR vaccine is already approved for them. (For adults, I'm not sure we have enough stock of that vaccine to matter, and I'm not sure if there's a point in producing it instead of the actual COVID vaccine, but for kids it's a good deal.)

    Why doesn't it affect kids? I'm currently mulling the decision to send my child back to in-person school so I'd like to know if there's a scientific basis for that or if it is just one of those rumors going round.

    I think it was a study of 80 people, so I'm not sure it could be said to actually prove anything. It just suggests that the reason why kids don't seem to suffer many symptoms from COVID (it doesn't seem to imply they can't get it, just its significantly less severe) is due to having recently received the mumps vaccine.

    The study is mainly talking about the correlations between us case rates per person in an age group and how that changes in a slightly odd way which correlates with the MMR vaccine times. Rates in the youngest children (before MMR dose 1) are elevated, and case rates collapse about the time of the first shot and then stay low for about as long as elevated antibody levels against mumps last. However, many many other things happen to children during this time. First exposures to other corona viruses, change in receptor distribution in the nose and throat, maturation of immune system and changes in levels of T cells.

    This weird “kids are very durable to viruses and disease” thing is common with many diseases, the only odd thing is that Covid19 seems to have a particularly strong effect in children over 6 months and under 14 and revert to the normal level of “durability” at 14.

    So, there are many strong scientific arguments for why kids catch it less, spread it less and suffer less when they catch it. It’s just that there are no solid proven reasons for why this effect seems to be so strong for Covid19. This might be one? But there are other reasons too, and it is still possible that kids catch it just as much as anyone else but just show so few symptoms that we don’t notice.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • BogartBogart Streetwise Hercules Registered User, Moderator Mod Emeritus
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-56513371

    India halts exports of vaccines, even to Brazil. A tough time indeed. Novavax desperately needs to hurry up and request approval, and the US needs to stop messing around with AZ approval so we can get more vaccines into the world supply chain. I have no hope for the US to reintroduce restrictions and start sharing vaccines more widely, but, perhaps Europe will be smart enough to see the dangers and keep sharing. Ideally all the countries would set a target (say, 15% fully vaccinated, and then beyond that they share 1% of their doses for each 1% they are beyond that number. So, if you have 25% of your population fully vaccinated, you share 10% inbound doses. 65% fully vaccinated, 50% of inbound doses and so on)

    We should have built more factories starting last year as soon as we realized the scale of the need. Yes yes, it would have been hard and complex and expensive. But, not as hard, expensive and complicated as not having built them is going to be.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • Jubal77Jubal77 Registered User regular
    https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7013e3.htm?s_cid=mm7013e3_w

    New CDC preliminary report/study regarding the incidence rate among thousands of first responders and essential workers from December - March.
    Prospective cohorts of 3,950 health care personnel, first responders, and other essential and frontline workers completed weekly SARS-CoV-2 testing for 13 consecutive weeks. Under real-world conditions, mRNA vaccine effectiveness of full immunization (≥14 days after second dose) was 90% against SARS-CoV-2 infections regardless of symptom status; vaccine effectiveness of partial immunization (≥14 days after first dose but before second dose) was 80%

  • XaquinXaquin Right behind you!Registered User regular
    Jubal77 wrote: »
    https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7013e3.htm?s_cid=mm7013e3_w

    New CDC preliminary report/study regarding the incidence rate among thousands of first responders and essential workers from December - March.
    Prospective cohorts of 3,950 health care personnel, first responders, and other essential and frontline workers completed weekly SARS-CoV-2 testing for 13 consecutive weeks. Under real-world conditions, mRNA vaccine effectiveness of full immunization (≥14 days after second dose) was 90% against SARS-CoV-2 infections regardless of symptom status; vaccine effectiveness of partial immunization (≥14 days after first dose but before second dose) was 80%

    that seems good?

  • MazzyxMazzyx Comedy Gold Registered User regular
    Xaquin wrote: »
    Jubal77 wrote: »
    https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7013e3.htm?s_cid=mm7013e3_w

    New CDC preliminary report/study regarding the incidence rate among thousands of first responders and essential workers from December - March.
    Prospective cohorts of 3,950 health care personnel, first responders, and other essential and frontline workers completed weekly SARS-CoV-2 testing for 13 consecutive weeks. Under real-world conditions, mRNA vaccine effectiveness of full immunization (≥14 days after second dose) was 90% against SARS-CoV-2 infections regardless of symptom status; vaccine effectiveness of partial immunization (≥14 days after first dose but before second dose) was 80%

    that seems good?

    It is very good.

    u7stthr17eud.png
  • BremenBremen Registered User regular
    Xaquin wrote: »
    Jubal77 wrote: »
    https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7013e3.htm?s_cid=mm7013e3_w

    New CDC preliminary report/study regarding the incidence rate among thousands of first responders and essential workers from December - March.
    Prospective cohorts of 3,950 health care personnel, first responders, and other essential and frontline workers completed weekly SARS-CoV-2 testing for 13 consecutive weeks. Under real-world conditions, mRNA vaccine effectiveness of full immunization (≥14 days after second dose) was 90% against SARS-CoV-2 infections regardless of symptom status; vaccine effectiveness of partial immunization (≥14 days after first dose but before second dose) was 80%

    that seems good?

    It's evidence that in addition to keeping most people from getting sick the vaccine seems to largely prevent asymptomatic cases, which probably means it does greatly reduce the ability of people with the vaccine to not spread it to others. That was somewhat in doubt - with most diseases you spread it when you're sick, so a vaccine that keeps you from getting sick can be reasonably assumed to prevent spread, but Covid can be spread from people who never feel sick so it wasn't conclusively known (though generally held as likely) that vaccinated people were unlikely to be contagious.

    It's incredibly good news because it makes herd immunity through widespread vaccination much more feasible.

  • CorvusCorvus . VancouverRegistered User regular
    :so_raven:
  • ShivahnShivahn Unaware of her barrel shifter privilege Western coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderator mod
    Corvus wrote: »

    Like, immediately after trying to give Astrazeneca vaccines to priority groups

    The whiplash from this is the real threat, I'm gonna end up with a concussion from how fast the province is switching what's going on

  • ToxTox I kill threads they/themRegistered User regular
    edited March 2021
    Céline Gounder is a doctor, NYU professor, and CNN medical analyst
    1/ Pregnant and breastfeeding women have a robust responses to the Pfizer & Moderna COVID vaccines and pass the immunity on to their babies:
    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33758889/
    2/ Importantly vaccinated women pass on much higher levels of protective antibodies to their fetus or newborn than do women who've had COVID.
    3/ As with influenza, pregnant women are at higher risk for severe disease when they get COVID. Women are also at higher risk for pre-term birthif they get COVID while pregnant.
    4/ Pregnant and breastfeeding women were not in the initial COVID vaccine trials. But pregnant healthcare workers who were eligible for vaccination starting in December stepped up and enrolled in this study so we could all benefit from their experience: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33758889/
    5/ These women experienced no increased risk of side-effects or more intense side-effects from the Pfizer and Moderna COVID vaccines while pregnant or breastfeeding.
    6/ BOTTOMLINE: If you're pregnant or breastfeeding, it's SAFE to get vaccinated against COVID. You're protecting yourself AND your baby.

    Tox on
    Discord Lifeboat | Dilige, et quod vis fac
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    Tox wrote: »
    Céline Gounder is a doctor, NYU professor, and CNN medical analyst
    1/ Pregnant and breastfeeding women have a robust responses to the Pfizer & Moderna COVID vaccines and pass the immunity on to their babies:
    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33758889/
    2/ Importantly vaccinated women pass on much higher levels of protective antibodies to their fetus or newborn than do women who've had COVID.
    3/ As with influenza, pregnant women are at higher risk for severe disease when they get COVID. Women are also at higher risk for pre-term birthif they get COVID while pregnant.
    4/ Pregnant and breastfeeding women were not in the initial COVID vaccine trials. But pregnant healthcare workers who were eligible for vaccination starting in December stepped up and enrolled in this study so we could all benefit from their experience: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33758889/
    5/ These women experienced no increased risk of side-effects or more intense side-effects from the Pfizer and Moderna COVID vaccines while pregnant or breastfeeding.
    6/ BOTTOMLINE: If you're pregnant or breastfeeding, it's SAFE to get vaccinated against COVID. You're protecting yourself AND your baby.

    Two vaccines for the price of 1!

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular

    Well? They are reporting 100% effacacy so far. Even better in that age group than in adults it seems like and that age group seems to be a key one for controlling the virus since they seem to get infected equally frequently but not sick, as opposed to younger kids who seem to both be less frequently infected and get less sick.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • BurtletoyBurtletoy Registered User regular
    15 million doses of the Johnson and Johnson vaccine to be discarded due to manufacturing errors at their contract manufacturing organization, Emergent Biosolutions.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/31/world/johnson-and-johnson-vaccine-mixup.html

    In personal news, my CEO is currently at this facility to observe the manufacturing process. Whoops

  • CorvusCorvus . VancouverRegistered User regular

    Burtletoy wrote: »
    15 million doses of the Johnson and Johnson vaccine to be discarded due to manufacturing errors at their contract manufacturing organization, Emergent Biosolutions.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/31/world/johnson-and-johnson-vaccine-mixup.html

    In personal news, my CEO is currently at this facility to observe the manufacturing process. Whoops

    Well, maybe you're about to get promoted?

    :so_raven:
  • ceresceres When the last moon is cast over the last star of morning And the future has past without even a last desperate warningRegistered User, Moderator Mod Emeritus
    Maybe your boss is the one who caught it and therefor the hero of the story?

    And it seems like all is dying, and would leave the world to mourn
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    Burtletoy wrote: »
    15 million doses of the Johnson and Johnson vaccine to be discarded due to manufacturing errors at their contract manufacturing organization, Emergent Biosolutions.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/31/world/johnson-and-johnson-vaccine-mixup.html

    In personal news, my CEO is currently at this facility to observe the manufacturing process. Whoops

    This is sad news but they will catch up again soon enough. The main issue is the speed at which we can get the USA 'done and start exporting vaccines as we should be doing.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • XaquinXaquin Right behind you!Registered User regular
    wonderful news

    I got the J&J vaccine 4 hours ago

    hope they were ok!

  • BurtletoyBurtletoy Registered User regular
    Emergent was not an approved manufacturer, so none of the vaccines they have made have left the facility so far. The J&j doses so far have all come from their facility in the Netherlands

  • zepherinzepherin Russian warship, go fuck yourself Registered User regular
    That’s going to end up in court.

  • edited April 2021
    This content has been removed.

  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-confirm-high-efficacy-and-no-serious

    Pfizer releases an update for their phase 3 trial. Numbers are for symptomatic infections

    Worldwide

    77 in vaccine group
    Vs
    850 in placebo group

    USA

    50 cases in vaccinated group
    Vs
    647 in placebo group

    South Africa (66% of cases are B.1.1351, the SA variant with the largest suppressing effect against antibody activity on the bench)

    0 cases in vaccinated group
    Vs
    9 cases in placebo group

    Depending on your definition of severe disease, the vaccine was also between 95 and 100% effective at reducing that worldwide ( 0 vs 32 or 1 vs 21)

    These numbers continue to be exceptional and means the vaccine now has more demonstrated effacacy over a longer time vs more variants.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • CorvusCorvus . VancouverRegistered User regular
    Did the Pfizer results for their trial in 12-15 years old get mentioned in here?

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/pfizer-study-suggests-covid-19-vaccine-is-safe-protective-in-younger-teens-1.5970857
    CBC wrote:
    Pfizer announced Wednesday that its COVID-19 vaccine is safe and strongly protective in kids as young as 12, a step toward possibly beginning shots in this age group before they head back to school in the fall.

    Most COVID-19 vaccines being rolled out worldwide are for adults, who are at higher risk from the novel coronavirus. Pfizer's vaccine is authorized for ages 16 and older.

    In a study of 2,260 U.S. volunteers ages 12 to 15, preliminary data showed there were no cases of COVID-19 among fully vaccinated adolescents compared to 18 cases among those given dummy shots, Pfizer reported in a media release on Wednesday.

    It's a small study, that hasn't yet been published, so another important piece of evidence is how well the shots revved up the kids' immune systems. Researchers reported "robust antibody responses," the release said.

    Kids had side effects similar to young adults, the company said. The main side effects are pain, fever, chills and fatigue, particularly after the second dose. The study will continue to track participants for two years for more information about long-term protection and safety

    Getting kids vaccinated is going to be a major part of getting things back to normal.

    :so_raven:
  • AimAim Registered User regular
    Wapo tracker has US at over 100 million first doses administered.

  • ManetherenWolfManetherenWolf Registered User regular
    Elvenshae wrote: »

    Alabama is opening to 16 and up starting Monday. Just announced it earlier today.

  • EinzelEinzel Registered User regular
    https://uk.news.yahoo.com/hiv-vaccine-based-moderna-covid-142438810.html
    The novel vaccine stimulated the production of rare immune cells needed to generate antibodies against HIV in 97 per cent of participants in phase one of human trials.

    Kinda Covid related in that we're doing mRNA HIV vaccines now.

    Easy prediction - large HIV outbreak in the middle of the USA in 10 years.

  • AbacusAbacus Registered User regular
    edited April 2021
    So, Peru has presidential elections on the 15th. And one of the candidates is this guy:
    I won't bring vaccines, let privates bring them.
    Simeon Tegel is a British journalist living in Peru.

    Note that De Soto (yup, that De Soto, the economist) got a state-sponsored vaccine without paying anything on the US, the scandal is so big that the US Embassy in Peru itself had to answer:
    Visitors can visit the US on a B-1 / B-2 visa for a variety of reasons, including medical treatments. Eligibility to receive a vaccine remains under the authority of the health services of each state. More information►https: //bit.ly/39cDz5i

    Abacus on
  • redxredx I(x)=2(x)+1 whole numbersRegistered User regular
    edited April 2021
    Ugh... Texas to require proof of citizenship for vaccination in 3, 2, 1...

    redx on
    They moistly come out at night, moistly.
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited April 2021
    Because then we can scapegoat the undocumented for continued spread and as a bonus lots of them die.

    enlightenedbum on
    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • AbacusAbacus Registered User regular
    edited April 2021
    Because then we can scapegoat the undocumented for continued spread and as a bonus lots of them die.

    Which shouldn't work, because this was documented and legal. Some states have open doors for anybody over 60 since months ago, and now have open door for people under 16. So vaccine tourism, while obviously a priviledge of the rich, works without issue. And ironically he said that he got it on Houston.

    Note that this is a country where there was an scandal a month or so ago because the vaccine study for Sinopharm, that was going to propel Peru to the edge on medical investigation....turned out to be just a way to sneak vaccines into the country so that politicians, their families and the rich could vaccinate themselves first. Which is one of the reasons why the new government (long story) is now on the waitlist for Pfizer.

    Abacus on
Sign In or Register to comment.