Donate SIGN UP

Has The Oxford Vaccine Be Hyped?

Avatar Image
Sunk | 19:46 Thu 26th Nov 2020 | News
65 Answers
Astra/Zeneca’s share price has plummeted on fears that the vaccine will not be licensed for use in the USA.

Investors are doubting the results.
AZ originally claimed 70% effectiveness. That was bumped up to 90% on the results from two doses. But that turns out to have been done by error. A more clinical test of Brazilians only gave a 62% result.
There was criticism that the trial did not test on any older people, anyone over 55 was excluded.

62% is still impressive, but a third less than the other two. Have we been slightly misled?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/26/scrutiny-grows-over-oxford-universityastrazeneca-vaccine
Gravatar

Answers

21 to 40 of 65rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 Next Last

Avatar Image
It's entirely appropriate to scrutinise the results, although it's worth noting that *all* drug companies so far have only announced preliminary vaccine studies. It's more important to back a vaccine that works than a vaccine that's made here. Given the choice, I want to see the Astra/Zeneca one working, not least because it will be the cheapest, offered...
20:50 Thu 26th Nov 2020
Question Author
It seems to be US regulators and business analysts who are sceptical of the rigour of the Oxford trials.
Maybe I am being niave. Maybe the US Government wants to pay far more for a US vaccine than a much cheaper one. That might be true, but by not disclosing a dosing error and instead presenting it as a benefit seems disingenuous. Whatever, it seems to have cast doubt and confusion that only the most blinkered and bigoted anti-foreigner is happy to dismiss.
"by not disclosing a dosing error and instead presenting it as a benefit seems disingenuous."

Did they not disclose the error when the figures had been released.
Question Author
OG,
// [Oxford Vaccine] Probably useful as backup when more successful vaccines are in short supply. //

We have bought 5 Million doses of the for profit Moderna vaccine, and 100 Million of the AZ one which is cheap. Time will tell if that is a false economy.

Sunk: "but by not disclosing a dosing error and instead presenting it as a benefit seems disingenuous. " - stop lying they disclosed the error I saw the professor bloke on TV the other day, that's how they explained the 90% figure. That's how we know of the serendipitous error.
Question Author
TCL

No they didn’t disclose the half dose/Full dose was a mistake and due to a manufacturing error.
Normally in a trial, that compromised data would not have been included. But it had unexpectedly good results so they couldn’t resist mixing the two results. Except the one giving 90% effectiveness was trialed on people who were young and not high risk.
Question Author
TTT,
The explained it was based on the half dose/full dose duel results, but they never said the half dose was because of a mess up and was unintended.
sunk, rubbish, i heard them talking about the results on the news they said some had been given 2 full doses and some a half followed by a full and the latter yielded the 90% figure. STOP LYING!
Sunk: "but they never said the half dose was because of a *** up and was unintended." - yes they did STOP LYING, what is your agenda here?
I believe Sunks version. spot on.
21:58, there's the nail in your coffin sunk!
Question Author
TTT
You are wrong.
You’ve probably heard that a lot in your life.
read LB's link YOU ARE WRONG!
"While skill and hard work drove development, AstraZeneca said it was a minor mistake that made the team realise how they could significantly boost the shot’s success rate, to as much as 90% from around 60%: by administering a half dose, followed by a full dose a month later." - busted!
No need to be so precious, TTT.
I'm not being precious, why is sunk ignoring the evidence to spout lies?
From the BBC website,
"Some of the shots were weaker than they were designed to be, containing much less of the ingredient that is meant to give a person immunity.

The jab is actually two shots, with the second given a month after the first as a booster.

While most of the volunteers in the trial got the correct dose for both of their two shots, some didn't.

Regulators were told about the error early on and they agreed that the trial could continue and more volunteers could be immunised.

The error had no effect on vaccine safety."

As the Regulators knew about the error At the time and it was also reported by the media, what is the problem?
serendip - - - error
oh god on something like this - you dont want : "I gave da wrong dose but its OK I fink"

real heart sink stuff. prof this morning saying - "well you should start again" but then the results are late. Does any one know how big the half-dose group was?
^^^ you are talking to sunk, right?
that was to TCL

21 to 40 of 65rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Has The Oxford Vaccine Be Hyped?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.