South Africa has paused the rollout of the AZ vaccine

timetogo2016

I agree EllanVannin.
Far too many people dying and far too many having bad reactions to it.
Not enough research.

Facts to back up your statements please.

timetogo2016 - uncorroborated and dangerous post. Unless you have any evidence?

I agree EllanVannin.
Far too many people dying and far too many having bad reactions to it.
Not enough research.

EllenVannin why do you go to local shops 'maskless'? Really do not understand that all. I have asthma and COPD, but wear a mask (with little plastic thingie underneath to hold it away from my mouth and nostrils) when I do my weekly supermarket shop, or visit any other shops, etc.
If you wish to refuse the vaccine that is only you, you are potentially hurting -but not to wear a mask at present times is potentially damaging others.

Covid isn't flu so a covid vaccine will not, I would have thought, stop us getting flu. In which case we still need a flu injection for this year's variety.

I believe the numbers getting flu are well down. Not, it's thought, because of CV but because our sanitary habits have improved, especially mask-wearing. Just think what we could save the NHS if we continued doing it in crowded and public places.

Will the second dose replace the usual annual 'flu vax I wonder ?

That’s interesting Suzie I wouldn’t have thought the the two vaccines were compatible to be given together but they must know different. I’ll be grateful for whatever they come up with.

When I had my first dose vaccination (Pfizer) last Thursday, the Doctor in charge said they were already looking into trials of Pfizer first dose, Astra Zeneca for the second and vice versa.

I am grateful that Scientists worldwide are working together on vaccines and sequencing Covid-19 and its variants.

During our last major crisis. WW11, we were asked to put up blackout curtains to protect our cities from night time bombing raids. The anti-curtainers, if there were any, would put others at risk, those who didn’t have blackout curtains put up wood, old clothes, whatever they could find because some protection is better than none.

BlueSky

Perhaps they’ll now decide to swap vaccine for the second dose, you’ll get the Pfizer if you had the Oxford AZ first time round, and vice versa, so everybody will have better immunity!

They are doing research now on using different doses for the two vaccines but it’s doubtful they won’t have the results before second doses start. Agree with Pippa the plan at the moment seems to be ( very sensibly) to carry on developing vaccines which will be effective against known new variants which cause concern. Atm this is looking like a booster in the autumn. It will be interesting when more is known as to whether only AZ needs a booster or if Pfizer will as well.

It didn't sound like it listening yesterday. I think they will get us all up to the two dose level and then go for boosters - until they change their mind of course .

Perhaps they’ll now decide to swap vaccine for the second dose, you’ll get the Pfizer if you had the Oxford AZ first time round, and vice versa, so everybody will have better immunity!

I do understand what you are saying Suziewoozie, about the absence of evidence not being the evidence of absence but I would still say while there is an absence of evidence we should not rush to judgement either positively or nagatively.

We do know what it does do and that is why we are using it.

PippaZ

I didn't realise the study, conducted by South Africa’s University of the Witwatersrand and Oxford, has not yet been peer-reviewed. I think others have said it involved a relatively small sample pool of a few thousand people, with the median age of 31.

That makes me think it is premature to draw any conclusions from the study (positive or negative), until we get further information.

There are several issues here imo. One is that since the get go pre peer reviewed papers have been published - the first AZ paper before peer review was reported in an AZ press release. Secondly, whilst peer review is a necessary part of the whole process, when we have reputable bodies carrying out the research, i think there can be high degree of confidence in the initial results. Thirdly, if initial results are flagging up something that may be potentially serious, it is only ethical to flag up those findings ASAP. It works the other way too ethically. I know of clinical trials ( not vaccine ones) that have at a relatively early stage flagged up such promising early results that the placebo arm was halted as unethical.
As for numbers, these trials will have been properly ‘powered’. This is done by statisticians and basically means that the number of subjects in the trial is sufficient for statistically significant results to be obtained. This depends on what outcomes you are wanting to measure. As a general rule, the smaller the effect you are measuring, the larger the sample needs to be and vice versa.
One problem with the original AZ research is that some of the subgroups were too small for the results to be statistically significant. This is what led to some countries not authorising the vaccine for the over 65s because that subgroup was only 300 or so and it was not possible to have a statistically significant result from such a small number.
With the SA research it’s about 1000 in each arm but as we know, nobody over 40 so there weren’t even any results to be statistically significant or otherwise - which is why I keep rabbiting on about ‘absence of evidence’.

Well, Matt is on TV at 5pm. Maybe he will have some answers!

We should always work on a worst case scenario situation. If we’d done that at the start of the pandemic we wouldn’t now have a pandemic. If measures had to taken to contain the Kent variant several months ago the infection rate wouldn’t have gone through the roof. I voiced concerns about the S African variant at the start of February but it was poo poo’d. Even now people are flooding into the country and not being quarantined. The government still haven’t sorted out contracts with the hotels involved. As ever it’s too little too late.we’ve got to stay ahead of this virus, not constantly playing catch-up.

I didn't realise the study, conducted by South Africa’s University of the Witwatersrand and Oxford, has not yet been peer-reviewed. I think others have said it involved a relatively small sample pool of a few thousand people, with the median age of 31.

That makes me think it is premature to draw any conclusions from the study (positive or negative), until we get further information.

ellenvannin if you don’t want any more vaccinations that’s your decisions I don’t really understand why you had one at all I believe the Norway deaths were very old folks with underlying problems
So why have one then not want the additions you should have left it for someone else ...a waste

We knew from the get go that none of the vaccines would stop us getting it, just stop it causing us severe illness or death, and that still seems to be the case
Whats actually changed?
Anyway that’s totally good enough for me

GrannyGravy13

suziewoozie I have not got a science background, I rely on a wide range of experts, if they are sloppy with words and explanations who do folks like me turn to for information?

I hope you don’t mind me having a go at this question sooziewoozie. GG13 I wouldn't rely on any of them that appear on any of the news programs or in the papers. There is one Public Health expert that appears a lot here in Scotland that never says anything that we couldn't have worked out for ourselves. I never knew we had so many epidemiologists in this country and it seems to me they all want to be on the news. That said, Prof Sarah Gilbert seems to me to be very even handed and careful in what she says. Stephen Reicher from St Andrews is good too.

I heard Hancock call Prof. Whitty one of our “greatest living scientists” the other day. Sorry, no, he’s a good man, very committed, but our greatest living scientists are people we’ve never heard of, working away and getting things done.
We all get drawn into discussions about whether a certain vaccine is 90% effective, or 50% effective, or how best to roll it out, or whether 3 weeks or 12 weeks are best, and whoever appears on the news to talk about it has their own perspective.

Suzie I had the Oxford AZ which I preferred and still do. What I mean is if it ‘just’ prevents serious illness and death, I’m happy with it, and I’ll gratefully have the second.

Riversidegirl

Yes, we are quite upset about the whole "non-explanation". My DH went the week before me and received the AZ. When I went I received the Pfizer. So we are now concerned about his second jab, but there does not seem to be anyone who cares enough to tell us anything.

There’s really nothing to tell at the moment imo. I had the AZ and had always wanted Pfizer.When I heard this latest news, I just thought that there’s nothing I can do about it now except go for my second jab and then the booster in the autumn if that’s on offer.

Yes, we are quite upset about the whole "non-explanation". My DH went the week before me and received the AZ. When I went I received the Pfizer. So we are now concerned about his second jab, but there does not seem to be anyone who cares enough to tell us anything.

Washerwoman

I'm not saying it shouldn't be reported.But it was the lead story delivered in doom laden tone.
The SA variant is not most prevalent here.If course its an ongoing situation,and scientists have already said vaccines may need adjusting .However for any anti vaxxers or anyone sitting in the fence let's have reporting with a sense of proportion surely ?If the worst case scenario is it is somewhat less effective but prevents severe and hospitalised cases,and given the efficiency of the vaccination rollout there is surely still some cause for optimism?

Yes I know the SA variant isn’t prevalent here - yet. It’s really important we keep it that way. The SA research tells us nothing atm about the AZ efficacy with severe outcomes on the SA variant. As I keep saying - absence of evidence. Obviously I don’t know how the BBC reported it - I gave up watching BBC TV news years ago. I do know how it’s being reported/ commented on all over the place today and apart from a few exceptions, much of the reporting is dire either rubbishing the research or doom laden as you say. All I’m commenting on is the facts of the research and trying to explain what absence of evidence means compared with evidence of absence. In reality, I’m sure many of us are just carrying on as we were before being vaccinated - that’s all we can do. If there were evidence of its efficacy against severe illness, I still wouldn’t change my behaviour. The most important factors for me are the % of the population that has been vaccinated and the number of daily cases.

I'm not saying it shouldn't be reported.But it was the lead story delivered in doom laden tone.
The SA variant is not most prevalent here.If course its an ongoing situation,and scientists have already said vaccines may need adjusting .However for any anti vaxxers or anyone sitting in the fence let's have reporting with a sense of proportion surely ?If the worst case scenario is it is somewhat less effective but prevents severe and hospitalised cases,and given the efficiency of the vaccination rollout there is surely still some cause for optimism?

I've had all kinds of vaccinations.
2 in 1957 for Asian 'flu.
Smallpox
T.B.
Hepatitis A.
Typhoid and Yellow Fever.
Pneumonia.
Shingles.
Yearly 'flu.
Present day.