I wonder if "pregnancy age nurses" around the country have refrained from getting the vaccine. I know a few.
I’d have to look back and find the links but the UK posted a warning for women who were or planning on pregnancies and breastfeeding.
Moving to not hold back second doses in the U.S.. Will move more quickly to vaccinate people over65 and younger people with medical conditions. US shifts to speed vaccinations; won’t hold back 2nd doses https://apnews.com/article/us-news-coronavirus-pandemic-8e846e47cd71f39fed71dcd6700d729b Barely a month into a mass vaccination campaign to stop the COVID-19 pandemic, the Trump administration unexpectedly shifted gears Tuesday to speed the delivery of shots after a slow start that had triggered widespread concern from states and public health officials. Health and Human Services Alex Azar announced two major changes. First, the government will no longer hold back required second doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, practically doubling supply. Second, states should immediately start vaccinating other groups lower down the priority scale, including people age 65 and older, and younger people with certain health problems. The move better aligns the outgoing administration with the new Biden-Harris team. On Friday, President-elect Joe Biden said he will rapidly release most available vaccine doses to protect more people. He said he supported immediately releasing vaccines that health authorities were holding back out of caution, to guarantee they would be available for people needing their second dose. “We had been holding back second doses as a safety stock,” Azar said on ABC. “We now believe that our manufacturing is predictable enough that we can ensure second doses are available for people from ongoing production. So everything is now available to our states and our health care providers.” Simultaneously, he gave states the green light to dramatically expand the pool of people eligible to receive vaccines. “We are calling on our governors to now vaccinate people aged 65 and over, and under age 65 with a (health condition) because we have got to expand the group,” he said. As of Monday morning, the government had distributed about 25.5 million doses to states, U.S. territories and major cities. But only about 9 million people had received their first shot. That means only about 35% of the available vaccines had been administered. Initially, the shots were going to health care workers and nursing home residents. Those 75 and older were next in line. But problems arose even in vaccinating that limited pool of people. Some hospital and nursing home workers have been hesitant to get the vaccine. Scheduling issues created delays in getting shots to nursing homes. Some states, including Arizona, have or are planning to open up mass vaccination centers, aiming to inoculate thousands of people a day in a single location. In other states, local health authorities have started asking residents 65 an older to register, in anticipation the vaccination campaign would be expanded. “We’ve got to get to more channels of administration,” said Azar. “We’ve got to get it to pharmacies, get it to community health centers. “We will deploy teams to support states doing mass vaccination efforts if they wish to do so,” he added. Although Azar said the shift was a natural evolution of the Trump administration’s efforts, as recently as Friday he had raised questions about whether Biden’s call to accelerate supplies was prudent. The Trump administration, which directed a crash effort to develop and manufacture vaccines, is hoping to avoid a repeat of earlier debacles with coronavirus testing. Dubbed “Operation Warp Speed,” the effort has produced two highly effective vaccines, with more on the way. Each state has its own plan for who should be vaccinated, based on recommendations from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The CDC recommendations give first priority to health care workers and nursing home residents. But the slow pace of the vaccine rollout has frustrated many Americans at a time when the coronavirus death toll has continued to rise. More than 376,000 people have died, according to the Johns Hopkins database. U.S. Surgeon General Jerome Adams said hundreds of thousands of people are getting vaccinated every day across the nation, but the pace of inoculations needs to improve. “We’re in a race against this virus and quite frankly, we’re behind,” Adams told “Fox & Friends.” “The good news is that 700,000 people are getting vaccinated every single day. We’re going to hit 1 million people and we need to continue to pick up that pace.” Biden is expected to give a speech Thursday outlining his plan to speed vaccines to more people in the first part of his administration. His transition team has vowed to release as many vaccine doses as possible, rather than continuing the Trump administration policy of holding back millions of doses to ensure there would be enough supply to allow those getting the first shot to get a second one. The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine requires a second shot about three weeks after the first vaccination. Another vaccine, this one produced by Moderna, requires a second shot about four weeks afterward. One-shot vaccines are still undergoing testing.
Coronavirus: Scientists concerned by way data from Chinese drug firm Sinovac’s vaccine trials is coming out The firm’s Brazilian partner the Butantan Institute has promised to disclose more information after it claimed the drug had a 78 per cent efficacy rate But researchers question the figure and ask why the Chinese pharmaceutical company has not commented publicly on the trial results https://www.scmp.com/news/china/sci...ientists-concerned-way-data-chinese-drug-firm Scientists have criticised the way data from the trials of a vaccine made by the Chinese drug company Sinovac has been released, saying it has caused confusion. The complaints have prompted the pharmaceutical company’s Brazilian partner, the Butantan Institute, to promise to provide the complete data at a conference on Tuesday, although it is not clear whether they will be able to address all the concerns raised. Last week the institute released the long awaited efficacy data for the Sinovac vaccine after two delays in December. It said that the vaccine was found to be 78 per cent effective in a trial involving 12,400 health care workers in Sao Paulo state, describing it as a “fantastic” result. But Sinovac and the Chinese government have yet to comment on the data. Jerome Kim, director general of the International Vaccine Institute, criticised the way information was trickling out: “It is confusing when the group [Sinovac] that has access to the data from Indonesia, Turkey, and Brazil makes no official comment as its trial data are presented piecemeal. Are these authorised or unauthorised? If they are authorised, why doesn’t the company comment? “We don’t know how the analysis was done. We also don’t know if the analyses can be combined. Is this an official number that Sinovac will stand by?” Sinovac did not respond to questions about when a combined analysis will be released. A source at a Chinese vaccine manufacturer has previously said that all data had to be verified by the government to avoid discrepancies. Scientists have also said that the information that has been made available about Sinovac’s vaccine suggests that the efficacy level is much lower than 78 per cent. Last week, Dimas Covas, director of the Butantan Institute, told a press conference that about 220 participants in the trials had been infected with Covid-19 – 160 in the placebo group and almost 60 of those who received the vaccine. The trial protocol said that the number of volunteers receiving placebos and the vaccines should be evenly split, but the institute has not disclosed the actual numbers of the two groups. “It was a 1:1 randomisation of 13,000 volunteers. So, 6,500 each to vaccine and placebo. Sixty infected vaccinated, 220 infected unvaccinated. Isn’t that less than 78 per cent? “ Kim said. “It seems more like the AstraZeneca regimen [which achieved] 62 per cent, which is 70 per cent if they combined the half-dose group with the rest.” Peter Smith, a professor of tropical epidemiology at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, gave a similar assessment. “If the numbers of cases in vaccinated and placebo groups are truly 60 and 160 respectively, this corresponds to a vaccine efficacy of 62 per cent,” he said. On Monday Reuters reported that the Butantan Institute would announce that the drug’s “general efficacy” would be around 60 per cent, while the figure of 78 per cent referred to its “clinical efficacy”, although it is not clear how these figures were calculated. There have also been partial disclosures of the results from two other Sinovac trials, in Indonesia and Turkey, with the former having 65 per cent efficacy and the latter 91 per cent, although these were based on a relatively small number of cases and infections. “Looking at all of these partially reported results together would suggest a likely efficacy of the vaccine of around 65 to 70 per cent,” Smith said, which was “not dissimilar” to the results from the drug AstraZeneca produced in collaboration with Oxford University. Smith said that piecemeal disclosures are not uncommon as it is a way to prevent insider trading, but the problem in this case is that very few details have been given in press releases and “to my knowledge, these results have not been presented either at international meetings or submitted to peer-reviewed journals. Without such further details there is bound to be speculation about the credibility of such data as has been released”. The delays and lack of information also pose a problem for regulators waiting to approve the vaccines. For example, Hong Kong, which plans to buy 7.5 million doses of the vaccine, has had to delay the review of its emergency use application. The delays and lack of information also pose a problem for regulators waiting to approve the vaccines. For example, Hong Kong, which plans to buy 7.5 million doses of the vaccine, has had to delay the review of its emergency use application.
Johnson & Johnson One Shot Covid-19 Vaccine Delayed Johnson & Johnson’s one-shot Covid-19 vaccine reportedly is as much as two months behind original production schedule and won’t catch up until the end of April. https://www.thestreet.com/investing/johnson-johnson-jnj-one-shot-covid-19-vaccine-delayed Johnson & Johnson’s (JNJ) - Get Report one-shot Covid-19 vaccine reportedly is as much as two months behind the original production schedule and won’t catch up until the end of April. Citing people familiar with the matter, The New York Times reported that while Johnson & Johnson expects to release results from its Covid-19 vaccine trial in as little as two weeks, production likely is facing hold-ups due to manufacturing delays that will prevent the vaccine from getting out the door and into arms until April. The delays come as the U.S. continues to face record infections, hospitalizations and deaths resulting from the novel coronavirus, which to date has infected some 91.6 million people, resulting in more than 1.96 million deaths, according to John Hopkins University. More than 4,300 people died from the disease on Tuesday,as the nation’s total death toll surpassed 380,000. Johnson & Johnson Chief Scientific Officer Paul Stoffels told the Times that if the data is positive and the Food and Drug Administration approves the vaccine for emergency use, Johnson & Johnson would be able to contribute to the vaccination drive in the U.S. sometime in March. However, apparent lags in Johnson & Johnson’s production abilities could still hamper efforts to roll out vaccine and get it into arms. Federal officials have been told that the company has fallen as much as two months behind the original production schedule and won’t catch up until the end of April, when it was supposed to have delivered more than 60 million doses. If Johnson & Johnson's vaccine can strongly protect people against Covid-19, as some outside scientists expect, it would offer big advantages over the two vaccines currently authorized in the U.S., which require two doses and more complicated cold-storage requirements. Pfizer (PFE) - Get Report and BioNTech (BNTX) - Get Report as well as Moderna (MRNA) - Get Report were given emergency authorization to roll out their vaccines last month. The U.S. remains behind its schedule for vaccinations. As of Tuesday, 27 million vaccines had been distributed though only 9 million had been administered, according to Centers for Disease Control data. Shares of Johnson & Johnson were up 0.48% at $158.89 in premarket trading on Wednesday.
Note the two vaccines approved in the U.S. are 95% effective. A 50% effectiveness rate is pretty low... akin to being just about worthless (according to some commentators). Brazil researchers now say China’s Sinovac vaccine is 50% effective — lower than announced earlier https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/13/chi...int4percent-effective-in-brazilian-trial.html Brazil’s Butantan Institute is the first to complete late-stage trial of CoronaVac, a Covid-19 vaccine developed by China’s Sinovac Biotech. The institute had said last week that late-stage trial data showed CoronaVac was 78% effective among volunteers with mild to severe infections, reported the Wall Street Journal. But on Tuesday, the institute said the vaccine’s overall efficacy rate fell to 50.4% when including “very mild” cases that did not require medical assistance, the Journal reported. The Covid-19 vaccine developed by China’s Sinovac Biotechis just 50.4% effective in a Brazilian trial — barely meeting the threshold for regulatory approval and well below the initially reported efficacy rate, according to several media reports. Brazil is the first to complete late-stage trial of the vaccine CoronaVac. The state-run Butantan Institute has been criticized by scientists and health experts for a lack of transparency in making public its trial data. The institute reportedly delayed releasing trial results three times — which it blamed on a confidentially clause in its contract with Sinovac — and last week announced partial data that showed an efficacy rate that was later revised much lower. Butantan said last week that CoronaVac was 78% effective among volunteers with mild to severe infections, reported the Wall Street Journal. But the institute said Tuesdaythat the overall efficacy rate fell to 50.4% when including “very mild” cases that did not require medical assistance, the Journal reported. In comparison, Covid vaccines from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna were found to be about 95% effective in their late-stage trials. Sinovac did not immediately respond to CNBC’s emailed request for comment. Hope for China’s vaccines Brazil and other developing nations have pinned their hopes on Chinese vaccines as wealthier countries snap up vaccines developed in the West. Sinovac’s CoronaVac vaccine is also cheaper and easier to transport because it can be stored in ordinary refrigerators — unlike the vaccines from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna that must be kept at subfreezing temperatures. The South American country has reported more than 8.1 million Covid infections in total, the third highest number globally, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University. The country’s death toll of over 204,000 is the second highest in the world, Hopkins data showed. Butantan has requested for CoronaVac to be authorized for emergency use, reported Reuters. Brazil’s health regulator Anvisa, which has stipulated a minimum 50% efficacy rate for vaccines in the pandemic, said it will meet on Sunday to decide, the news agency said. Trials in other countries In addition to Brazil, other developing countries including Turkey and Indonesia are also conducting trials on CoronaVac. Indonesia on Monday approved the vaccine for emergency use — the first country outside China to do so after interim data from a late-stage trial showed that CoronaVac was 65.3% effective, reported Reuters. Meanwhile, Turkish researchers said their interim analysis showed the vaccine to be 91.25% effective, Reuters reported last month. Experts quoted by the news agency said it’s not unusual for differential trials of a vaccine to show differing efficacy rates. But fragmental releases of CoronaVac trial data could add to skepticism and undermine confidence in the vaccine, Reuters said.
If China would just bring their studies into a controlled scientific study -peer reviewed- we could establish what is shiite and what might be salvageable but though don't have a good track record there. 50% effective is not good but with pharmaceuticals it is often just a dosing issue. So then the question becomes, "okay, you got 50% effectivity at X level so what were the effectivity levels and safety issues when administered at a higher level. That works in reverse too, ie. many pharmaceuticals have intolerable side effects in trial but it is just a dosing issue and it turns out that you can lower the dose and still get good results. Of course if they are already bullshiiting about what their results were for a certain level then you get off to a rocky start. Progress results from establishing certain facts at certain levels and then proceeding from there. If a horse pissed in a vial and they said it was 94% effective, well then that does not work. As I said yesterday and I will repeat it and then let it go. Anyone who wants to follow the progress of "the China vaccine" in the coming year will need a scorecard to tell the players. They have five or six cooking and are hellbent on releasing all of them and a couple are already out and every month brings more. So if in March, for example, you think you read something about the vaccine progress you will have to keep track of what is working and what is not and which country got which chinese vaccine, etc. etc. Just as a quick aside, I will point out that even with the flu shot in the U.S. there is a triple-strength flu vaccine for seniors that is available at any pharmacy. I say that just to continue to point out that vaccines- whether American or Chinese- can often made to be more effective by jacking up the dosage level. Sometimes not. Sometimes it is jacked up in the form of increasing the level of actual vaccine at the initial and sometimes it is done by just telling certain categories of patients that they need a booster shot every year or every other year, whatever. Western world researchers who are not lying through their arse can figure all that out, it is what they do. The Chinese? Not so sure. They administer first and figure it out from there. In regard to China putting the hammer down on other vaccines: https://www.scmp.com/news/china/sci...says-it-can-produce-1-billion-doses-sinopharm
its funny I see 95% percent effective rate in articles. But... when click around I see what the trials found... it was 95% of the group not get severe Covid. (this was for Bio N Tech / Phizer... Then I saw an article stating the results were lower the higher the age group. Then I saw different info for Moderna. Does anyone have the actually science and data... with the accurate statements from say the CDC or the manufacturers in which they back their statements with the data?
There are reams of data available for for both Moderna and Pfizer after their Phase 3 trial and approval. See the NIH press releases, NEJM study info, etc. https://www.nih.gov/news-events/new...wed-report-moderna-covid-19-vaccine-publishes https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2035389 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33301246/ https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577
Even if companies present good data, I think, possibly through no fault of their own, there is a worldwide discussion of vaccine effectiveness but with no uniform, standardized definition of effective. Lay people and the media often take "effective" to mean "it will prevent you from contracting and transmitting covid." That definition has now given way a bit since everyone is getting real about the fact that no researchers for any vaccine or any country have said anything about transmission. Or if they have, they have no specific study that looked that. So then there is a definition of "effective" meaning it will at least protect the vaccinated person from contracted the disease beyond the few hours it takes to knock it out. A so-called "neutralizing" vaccine. And then we go down the list where some vaccine makers- and validly so- argue "whoa, hold on there cowboy, we consider a vaccine to be highly effective if it results in little or no hospitalizations whereas X number of the placebo group became seriouosly ill. And further down on the list but equally valid are those argue or will argue that their vaccine successfully cuts the mortality rate drastically even if lots of people became ill to some degree. Indeed, that is validly considered to be a measure of effectiveness. Because I have a large tolerance for some of the untidyness that goes with battlefield medicine and expedited implementation I am not necessarily in the whining crowd about the confusion there. But we are getting enough vaccine out there now to get better handle on that and sort out those various categories. You may not get the country vaccinated for years but there will soon be several million doses out there that should provide more information than the trial studies did. Unless they come back and say, duh, we did not look at it. Not good.