Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oxford vaccine shows sustained protection of 76% in 3-month gap til second dose

ox.ac.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 187 posts

Re: Oxford vaccine shows sustained protection of 76% in 3-month gap til second dose

#101

Post by o-__-o »

harry8 wrote: post #97
lbeltrame wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a reduction of the risk of symptomatic disease by 76% once vaccinated. But more importantly, there were no hospitalizations or deaths in the vaccinated people. This is a point the media often overlooks.

Is it known what the effect is on so-called "long covid" and other pretty serious long-term covid affects that might be suffered by people who don't get it badly enough to go to hospital?

Anecdotal evidence I’ve been gathering points to the vaccine making long term covid go away. I have no idea how this works, but it is tempting me into signing up for the vaccine

Re: Oxford vaccine shows sustained protection of 76% in 3-month gap til second dose

#102

Post by harry8 »

o-__-o wrote: post #101
harry8 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it known what the effect is on so-called "long covid" and other pretty serious long-term covid affects that might be suffered by people who don't get it badly enough to go to hospital?

Anecdotal evidence I’ve been gathering points to the vaccine making long term covid go away. I have no idea how this works, but it is tempting me into signing up for the vaccine

That's the dream. It would be nice to have something better than anecdotal evidence. I hope we do.

I wonder why the evidence of lack of it isn't being publicised.

Re: Oxford vaccine shows sustained protection of 76% in 3-month gap til second dose

#103

Post by ummonk »

strstr wrote: post #87
xvedejas wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first dose prevents hospitalization. Right now, for every second dose we give, that's a decision to deny someone a life-saving dose in favor of someone already protected. What a strange prioritization to make. The bright side is that, if the rate of vaccination continues to increase, those denied the first dose now should still get the first dose soon after. Let's hope we don't hit some manufacturing bottleneck.

The problem is the lack of certainty. Most suspect that you won't lose protection by waiting longer than the suggested timeline, but what you really don't want to do is sleep-walk into throwing away the currently administered doses. Frustratingly, I'm guessing the timelines for a study on the durability of single dose moderna/pfizer would take about as long as it will take to ramp up production.

That's not how the immune system works though; you aren't "throwing away" the currently administered doses if you wait until after immunity declines to give the booster dose.

Unless this virus is magically different from every other virus we create a vaccine for, waiting longer for the booster will create a better / longer-lasting immunity afterwards.

Re: Oxford vaccine shows sustained protection of 76% in 3-month gap til second dose

#104

Post by tomalpha »

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #100
jmorse2 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To reinforce this, one of the statistics that the beeb have wheeled out is that in the most vulnerable group being vaccinated (in the UK), aged 80+, one in ten of them will die regardless of covid in the next year. Quoted from "How to vaccinate the world -- Vaccine Hesitancy" [0] from 12 minutes in to 15 minutes. (And because it's BBC sounds, for some reason it randomly skips episodes when I load the page). The entir…

> the beeb Never heard this term. From context I'm assuming it's slang for the BBC?

Yep, and even more oddly:

> It is also known colloquially as "The Beeb", "Auntie", or a combination of both (as "Auntie Beeb") [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC

Re: Oxford vaccine shows sustained protection of 76% in 3-month gap til second dose

#105

Post by xiphias2 »

orra wrote: post #78
alkonaut wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Countries that have a supply of Pfizer/Moderna as well as AZ can understandably be more cautious with AZ to over-65 at least early on. It’s just a matter of assigning the right vaccine to the respective groups, e.g Pfizer to the elderly and AZ to healthcare workers. In a month or two there will be more data, but in Q2 there will also be more supply of Pfizer and Moderna in the EU. The EU can be cautious with AZ to el…

> Countries that have a supply of Pfizer/Moderna I'm very excited that RNA vaccines are now a reality. But the logistics for these RNA vaccines is much more difficult. Specialist freezers are required. Meaning it takes longer to vaccinate folk.

So far the lack of vaccines is the main problem in all countries except US. It seems completely managable so far.

Re: Oxford vaccine shows sustained protection of 76% in 3-month gap til second dose

#106

Post by jMyles »

carschno wrote: post #54
jMyles wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would participate in a challenge trial, for instance. Me too. And nearly everyone I know in my risk tier. We had an entire globe of low-risk people willing to be part of the most acute spread, whether for research, for personal immunity, or to be able to isolate for a defined time to protect loved ones, and we squandered it in favor of pseudoscientific horizontal interdictions like lockdowns. It's really an incre…

If the sample consists of volunteers, it's hardly random. In particular, given that these volunteers are "low-risk people", it means that the results of this experiment will yield virtually no useful conclusions for the higher-risk groups

Sure, I don't mean to suggest that it can be a replacement for RCTs for vaccines.

But there's a lot of information we left on the table. We had an opportunity to systematically formulate a controlled acute spread, studying the virology in a longitudinal way, studying the immune response in a more intimate and controlled way (from antibodies to the immune response after antibodies fade), and to examine the prevalence and role of innate immunity.

Beyond research, we had a chance to have tens of millions of people with verifiable immunity in Spring or Summer. People who then were in a great position to render aid to the marginalized communities who are instead bearing the brunt of lockdowns.

Instead, we traded all that for zero upside. And we have to deal with the enormous side effects of the horizontal interdiction as well.

Re: Oxford vaccine shows sustained protection of 76% in 3-month gap til second dose

#108

Post by nicoburns »

harry8 wrote: post #94
simonswords82 wrote: post #3

It just gets better and better for the UK - which is a relief because early January had some grim sickness and death numbers. Check out the data on the UK Gov dashboard if you've not seen it: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/ Also - we are all in lockdown, which helps.

Here's another way of framing it: Having messed this up so very badly doing idiotically risky things from the start the latest big risk taken by the UK government didn't actually backfire as badly as the previous ones. Others have pointed at the current per-capita deaths. This completely ignores the long-term effects to survivors accross the population. It can be a challenge to see how the UK government could have de…

To be fair to the UK government, their vaccine strategy has been spot on: lot's of investment and early. They've messed up basically every else, and still are. But I think they do deserve some credit for that.

Re: Oxford vaccine shows sustained protection of 76% in 3-month gap til second dose

#109

Post by iainmerrick »

o-__-o wrote: post #101
harry8 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it known what the effect is on so-called "long covid" and other pretty serious long-term covid affects that might be suffered by people who don't get it badly enough to go to hospital?

Anecdotal evidence I’ve been gathering points to the vaccine making long term covid go away. I have no idea how this works, but it is tempting me into signing up for the vaccine

Out of curiosity, why would you not want to sign up? All the vaccine results have been amazingly positive.

Re: Oxford vaccine shows sustained protection of 76% in 3-month gap til second dose

#110

Post by throwaway2245 »

harry8 wrote: post #94
simonswords82 wrote: post #3

It just gets better and better for the UK - which is a relief because early January had some grim sickness and death numbers. Check out the data on the UK Gov dashboard if you've not seen it: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/ Also - we are all in lockdown, which helps.

Here's another way of framing it: Having messed this up so very badly doing idiotically risky things from the start the latest big risk taken by the UK government didn't actually backfire as badly as the previous ones. Others have pointed at the current per-capita deaths. This completely ignores the long-term effects to survivors accross the population. It can be a challenge to see how the UK government could have de…

Also uncontrolled spread allowing the opportunity for significant mutations to evolve.

It's hard to understand how you can mess up worse than that.

Post reply on HN