No they didn’t claim that. They said there is a lack of data to make that claim because of the small numbers of over 65s included in the trial. Maybe that the Guardian journo doesn’t really understand this stuff. I’ve noticed that with a lot of the reporting, from all perspectives.
From the data I have seen, very few over 65 were included in the Oxford/AZ trial, and so the data is not strong. It is an oversight in the planning design. There is no evidence to say they are protected or that they are not protected. In Scottish legal jargon ...just Not Proven. I can see why Germany are bringing up the question...simply because they can, it raises doubts
This is how it was reported in The Times: ‘British regulators have acknowledged “uncertainty” about the effects in older people because of a lack of data but they insist that it has been shown to be safe and that there is no good reason to think that it will stop working once people reach 65.’ Who to believe, eh?
All medicines except those specifically aimed at the elderly, not just vaccines. Soriot from AZ now claiming that their decision not to recruit in this age group makes them somehow ethically superior to their competition. I’ll be amazed if he lasts much longer, he is too often the story. From the Daily Mail Online, of all places ‘British regulators had said that 660 older people took part in the Oxford/AstraZeneca trials, acknowledging that there were too few to derive an efficacy figure for that specific group. The trials showed one out of 341 older vaccine recipients testing positive for Covid-19, compared to one out of 319 who received a dummy jab - making a senior-specific comparison almost pointless.’ So the jab is no better than placebo based on those tiny numbers (they are tiny in a vaccine context, where whole populations could get the drug. For other things, like rare cancers, these would be big numbers). But it did, apparently, produce antibodies in those old folk who got it - but not enough to provide a statistically significant result with so few people involved. It’s interesting that these numbers only become widely shared when another country’s regulator raises some questions. The MHRA said none of this, to the best of my recollection, on approval. Under the headline - Our jab DOES work! Sometimes the sub editors should really read the copy before dreaming up a catchy slogan. Anyway, we’ll have real world data based on what has actually happened to the people who have received jabs by the different manufacturers and how many doses they have had soon. This is always more convincing than trial data, but it’s a bit dirtier.
I am a bit late to this party but Kiwi's post #16223 has the following statement: "Pfizer’s vaccines for the EU are produced at a plant in Belgium, but the factory is currently also supplying the United States, Britain and Canada". This does not tell the whole story - Pfizer have a facility in Kalamazoo Michigan.dedicated to supplying the US market - and while some Canadian politicians think that Pfizer should send vaccines across the border, it ain't happening. The US has a much greater nee for the vaccine than Canada does Up here, what Pfizer vaccines we have gotten have come from Belgium but they have instituted a big restriction in what they are shipping, 100% cut this week and 86% next week and of course the talk is no exports until the EU in whole has been vaccinated. It's fair - we didn't pay for development of their vaccine much less participated in it's development. but it leaves me, at 67, a little concerned especially since it is beginning to look like it could be late winter or early spring 2022 before I get the jab.
I am sure production will ramp up to incredible levels over the next few months Maple, and there are 3 or 4 other vaccines pretty close to submission and approval. Despite all the fussing going on, which I am contributing to, it has been an astonishing achievement to develop these medicines so fast, and it’s in everyone’s interest for as many people to get them before new variants prove more difficult to combat. I’d be surprised if a country like Canada doesn’t secure a couple of million jabs sharpish.
Agree our PM says so but the rollout has been shambles here and i am losing faith in the positive commentary emanating from Ottawa. But I sure hope you' re right
15,000 in the trial, over 4000 over 60. Sounds good. Only 50% effective against the South African variant according to a smaller scale phase 2 study held there, they are going to develop a new version for that.
VERY VERY PLEASED That is the one my daughter and son in law are both on. Lets hope they are on the active arm and not on the placebo. I also know 2 more elderly people on it...both with underlying conditions....maybe better designed than other trials. Mind you...this has adjuvent in it...so not suitable for people with allergies
Most studies are roughly 50/50, to maintain the statistical significance. They are both "blinded" they do not know what they were given When their natural time comes to receive the NHS vaccine they can ask to be unblinded...and can then make the choice ( if on the placebo arm) to receive the novavex vaccine, or the NHS vaccine.
Do you know when the over 60's on the trial get told if they were given a placebo, and do they then get an option of the actual vaccine if they were given a placebo? ( Sorry, I don't really expect you to know or answer this. I'm just curious. )
