Mostly Apolitical Thread for Discussing/Venting our Rational/Irrational COVID-19 Fears and Experiences in 2020

No.

My second shot was two and half months after the first shot.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-it-safe-to-delay-a-second-covid-vaccine-dose/

I think three months is not uncommon in the UK?

It was 12 weeks, now it's 8 iiuc.

Daniel_Rf you will have equal if not better protection two weeks after your second dose as someone who got their second dose on the "recommended schedule". So no need to worry in the long run. But you should assume you have very little or no immunity until that second dose.

just realizing the US REALLY hasn't used J&J much - 97% of the administered shots were mRNA (Moderna/Pfizer). It's not known yet how J&J does against Delta, but they're guessing it might be closer to how AstraZeneca is doing.

I have to wonder if the greater use of mRNA vaccines may help blunt the forthcoming localized surges in part of the country, at least when we cross 50% fully vaccinated threshold. it's not going to be enough to stop it outright, but I can't find data on how many of each type of shot was given in the UK to compare (I don't think they publish it, per OurWorldinData).

I wonder if the low use rates on J&J can be used as a proxy for how well or poorly the vaccine effort has reached into the homeless, migrant and indigent communities, where a single dose vaccine is going to be the most obvious choice because of the difficulty of scheduling a followup dose. I know it can't be a perfect proxy, because one of my sisters, who as a condo-owner in Seattle would have been a perfectly good candidate for an mRNA vaccine but she received J&J instead. Not sure why.

I can't find data on how many of each type of shot was given in the UK to compare

UK is mostly AstraZeneca - the standing joke is we're getting the cheap, rubbishy British vaccine - I hardly know anyone who's had Moderna.

i believe the az/mRNA breakdown in the UK is in the ballpark of 70/30 (almost no mRNA early on to older people, but almost all mRNA now that the focus is on younger people, who are told not to get AZ).

there are reasons to think the US will do (is doing?) "better" with delta than the UK: UK has slightly more people vaccinated, but more people still waiting for second dose and far fewer people with double mRNA protection.

basically US situation looks at a very high level more like israel, i.e. just over half the population full vaccinated with mRNA. cases fell much faster in israel because the rollout was faster and smoother and coincided with stricter lockdown measures, but the end states will hopefully be somewhat similar.

the challenge in the US is it's a big country with huge georgraphic and social/economic disparities so there's going to be large pockets (regions/states) where delta rages, which might make getting to ~= israel levels nationally tricky.

UK/Indian subcontinent, lots of links and travel to and from.

right, definitely that too, although the "protection" the US has there will slow things down not stop them.

Definite suspicion that, post-Brexit, the Tories were loath to alienate Modi by restricting travel to and from India until the very latest they could get away with.

there are definitely counties of FL that I think are going to get ravaged.

not where I live, thankfully.

look at that outbreak in the Manatee County government office.

caek and Neanderthal, what is the basis for thinking mRNA vaccines are so much better than the other ones?

In its Phase 3 trials (i.e. without newer variants) J&J reduced moderate to severe cases by 66%. AZ's phase 3 was a shitshow.

In real world study (i.e. with newer variants), Pfizer and Moderna reduced all cases (including mild and even asymptomatic) by 90%: https://www.statnews.com/2021/03/29/real-world-study-by-cdc-shows-pfizer-and-moderna-vaccines-were-90-effective/.

(also side effects)

i think i posted the email i wrote to my family when we had the choice to get J&J the next day or pfizer in a week or two and i explained why i thought we should wait. that has more detail. but i cannot open this whole thread to find it.

AZ and J&J are pretty good. if you'd have told me a year ago we'd have two vaccines that are above 50% effective and are massively less risky than being vulnerable to covid, and we'd have before the one year anniversary i'd have been thrilled.

but the mRNA vaccines are absolutely the greatest successes of 21st century medicine: given to hundreds of millions of people so far, almost perfectly safe, and almost perfectly effective at both protecting the recipient against severe cases *and* stopping the spread by surpressing mild cases (which wasn't even a goal of the trials!)

i remember the day the first mRNA phase 3 results came out. absolutely staggering. again, the threads here are too long to find it, but i'm sure i posted here.

caek i'm sure that i've read that you can't just say AZ is 60% against Delta, vs Pfizer 90-odd%, because of differences in how long it takes AZ to reach full effectiveness and in dose scheduling. i'm thinking of this actually - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/22/pfizer-and-astrazeneca-highly-effective-against-india-covid-variant

there is a long tweet thread about this that i can't find now. i was just wondering if there were something newer or if that's the study you're talking about.

it's frustrating trying to understand this stuff. some studies are about whether a vaccine stops infection at all. some are about whether they reduce hospitalisation rates. for instance this one:

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/uk-study-finds-vaccines-offer-high-protection-against-hospitalisation-delta-2021-06-14/

PHE said that the Pfizer/Biontech COVID-19 vaccine was 96% effective against hospitalisation from the Delta variant after two doses, while Oxford/AstraZeneca's offered 92% protection against hospitalisation by Delta.

but the mRNA vaccines are absolutely the greatest successes of 21st century medicine: given to hundreds of millions of people so far, almost perfectly safe, and almost perfectly effective at both protecting the recipient against severe cases *and* stopping the spread by surpressing mild cases (which wasn't even a goal of the trials!)

this does seem pretty good yeah

Oxford/AstraZeneca's offered 92% protection against hospitalisation by Delta

Hospitalization is a significant indicator, but you can have long term health effects from a case not requiring hospitalization. Ideally, you want any viral infection at detectable levels to have no symptoms at all. The mRNA vaccines really shine in that regard.

This thread is great at making us poor AZ saps feel really good about life.

lol seriously. as someone who has a vested interest in how good the AZ vaccine is i kinda want to include it in the 'modern miracles' category too! and if it's not really a modern miracle... how come?

you can't just say AZ is 60% against Delta

no, you can't. based on the shitshow AZ phase 3 trial it's probably about 70% effective against *serious cases* caused by the original strain. it's likely less effective against delta than against the original strain given the evidence about delta's transmisability. it's certainly less effective at stopping mild/asymptomatic cases, although they didn't measure that in the trial i the interests of time (neither did any of the others, but it's super important if your goal is to stop the disease spreading in addition to protecting the people who receive the vaccine).

you also can't say the mRNA vaccines are 90% effective against delta because there are no studies yet afaik. it's clearly not 100% effective as evidenced by the fact there are plenty of cases among vaccinated people in the US where almost everyone got an mRNA vaccine. but we do *know* mRNA vaccines are 90% effective against even *asymptomatic cases* earlier this year (with the kent/SA strains circulating). that's the study i linked, which is different to the one you linked.

note the one you linked is focused on symptomatic cases and even then is unambiguously saying that that pfizer provides more protection than AZ. the one you linked to was conducted in the UK, where the dose spacing is both long and changing, so that's a confounding variable and might be what was discussed in the twitter thread you saw. but i hadn't seen that study and my point is not dependent on it.

“This study provides reassurance that two doses of either vaccine offer high levels of protection against symptomatic disease from the B.1.617.2 India variant and we expect the vaccines to be even more effective at preventing hospitalisation and death,” said Mary Ramsay, head of immunisation at PHE.

this is both true and the right thing for a public health authority whose goal is to protect the most number of people to say, especially if you're logicistically constrained. and if your goal is to protect only yourself it's perfectly fine advice to follow. but it's not at all the full story. i don't want to say you're being lied to or that you shouldn't get the first one offered to you. but if you have a choice you should get pfizer or moderna and it's not even close. and this is especially true if you live with people who can't get vaccinated (e.g. children, immunocompromised, republicans you don't want to die, etc.).

it's frustrating trying to understand this stuff. some studies are about whether a vaccine stops infection at all. some are about whether they reduce hospitalisation rates.

studying how effective a vaccine is against asymptomatic infection is insanely expensive. the study i linked is one of the few big ones. i haven't seen any of AZ or J&J. and stopping severe cases is more important. so the focus has been on severe cases. but even by that metric, mRNA is more effective if you have a choice. AZ is good too though!

i live with children and i don't have a choice.

from a 'real world' study in May:

https://inews.co.uk/news/oxford-astrazeneca-vaccine-is-more-effective-than-thought-with-second-dose-preventing-89-of-illness-1012287

PHE epidemiologist Meaghan Kall said there was “evidence to show that Pfizer (initially thought to have the edge on effectiveness) is actually running head-to-head with Oxford/AZ”.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

but if you have a choice you should get pfizer or moderna

It wouldn't be the National Health Service if you had any choice.

but yes - that's still symptomatic infection.

xpost

yeah might even be "severe" or "serious".

are you in the uk or france these days tracer?

UK. france won't give the AZ jab as far as i know. or as i call it, 'The Clotter'.

Le Clotteurrrrrrrrrrr

looks a lot like everyone in the UK who got AZ will get pfizer in the second half of the year based on the UK buying a bunch of pfizer last month when it already has more doses than it needs

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/apr/28/uk-orders-60m-more-doses-of-pfizer-covid-vaccine-for-booster-jabs

that's based on

Apart from the ones who've already had two doses of Der Klotter?

Or are we talking third doses here?

yeah i think the idea is you've had zweimal das klo then you'll get a pfizer as a booster. they've been running trials on this in the UK since march.

the other thing to say is ultimately vaccine takeup in the UK will end up much higher than in the US, which is probably worth at least as much as a better vaccine in the long run.

UK probably going to race away with it among these countries by august, which like i say is probably worth at least much in public health terms

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&time=2020-03-01..latest&pickerSort=desc&pickerMetric=new_deaths_per_million&Metric=People+fully+vaccinated&Interval=7-day+rolling+average&Relative+to+Population=true&Align+outbreaks=false&country=USA~ISR~GBR

Good. I wouldn't mind getting a proper vaccine for a change!

i don't want to be a debbie downer! i had a choice and i waited a week to get pfizer. i think i'd have gotten J&J if i'd had to wait more like a month. J&J and AZ are both way, way, way better than nothing.

wow high praise from the pfizer rep over here

:)

Do you get a choice if you live in a Tory contituency?

Meh, AZ will turn out to better against the Andromeda Strain.

This thread is great at making us poor AZ saps feel really good about life.

The more people get any kind of vaccine at all, the better the virus can be suppressed.

My 70+ mother was able to get an appointment for AZ in October, and is now fretting about clots: I pointed out if she lives long enough to get a clot, she's doing better than millions of other folk.

could be worse. the trials of sinopharm and sinovac (different vaccines based on similar technology IIUC (i may not UC)) were extremely fishy in terms of detail/disclosure, and it seems they're not very effective at all in the real world: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/22/business/economy/china-vaccines-covid-outbreak.html.

(by could be worse, i mean you could be in a worse situation than living in a country using a random mixture of AZ and mRNA vaccines. it's not good that billions of people will be vaccinated dubious/demonstrably inneffective vaccines. if only there were countries with the ability to do something about that.)

Off topic from vaccines, but seems like my work is following the pattern I'm seeing in far too many places around here in the past few weeks - talking up a big game about continuing some form of remote work and encouraging hybrid options, only to pull the rug out from everyone at the last minute and decide, "nope, after all we do want butts in seats every day, so plan to get back in the office full-time".