Vaccine Trials

[Chuckanut]

The real question now will be distribution. I would vote for healthcare workers exclusively, then seniors in long-term care.

It will probably be professional athletes first. They seem to get all of what they need (PPE, testing with quick turn around, etc.) at the drop of a hat, helmet or mask.

 

[NW-Bound]

I don't know one thing about drug or vaccine manufacturing, but what is the likelihood that Pfizer will license to other pharmas to help turning out more vaccine doses?

And with the virus mutation as has been reported, the chance may be high that this will become a maintenance thing, unlike chickenpox or polio vaccine.

I am a capitalist at heart, and believe money is a good (the best?) motivator for people to crank out vaccine doses. Let them make money. I will pay for my shots.

 

[Gumby]

My order of priority would be this:

1. Healthcare workers (MDs, RNs, EMTs etc.)
2. Public Safety workers (fire and police)
3. Other essential workers who necessarily have close contact with many people (Transit workers, teachers, grocery store clerks)
4. Elderly people in congregate settings.
5. Anyone with impaired immune system.
6. Everyone else by inverse order of age.

As a category 6, I would expect to receive a vaccine sometime next summer.

 

[Dtail]

My order of priority would be this:

1. Healthcare workers (MDs, RNs, EMTs etc.)
2. Public Safety workers (fire and police)
3. Other essential workers who necessarily have close contact with many people (Transit workers, teachers, grocery store clerks)
4. Elderly people in congregate settings.
5. Anyone with impaired immune system.
6. Everyone else by inverse order of age.

As a category 6, I would expect to receive a vaccine sometime next summer.

Sounds reasonable.

 

[Brat]

I get healthcare workers, but I'd put groups that are more likely to spread the virus ahead of those confined to very limited space. For example, aren't young adults the biggest spreading group?

These vaccines prevent people from getting very sick, not from getting infected. Even the vaccinated can spread the disease. That is why 'herd immunity' is impossible. The human herd is not corralled, there will always be a significant portion that has not been vaccinated.

We all should continue to wear masks until all who don't wish to get sick have been vaccinated. The rest... well your choice, your consequences.

Oh, as someone mentioned there are several vaccines well along in testing. J&J has one that doesn't require refrigeration and reports I have heard is just as effective in preventing disease with one injection.

 

[braumeister]

My order of priority would be this:

1. Healthcare workers (MDs, RNs, EMTs etc.)
2. Public Safety workers (fire and police)
3. Other essential workers who necessarily have close contact with many people (Transit workers, teachers, grocery store clerks)
4. Elderly people in congregate settings.
5. Anyone with impaired immune system.
6. Everyone else by inverse order of age.

As a category 6, I would expect to receive a vaccine sometime next summer.

I agree with this ranking, or something close to it. Being an old codger, but in what I consider very good health, I have absolutely no problem with keeping up with the same precautions I've been following all along. I'm perfectly happy maintaining this degree of isolation from the world, so give the protection to those who don't have my flexibility.

 

[gauss]

I think there is an advisory panel of some sort in the US that has already published their recommendations and categories for vaccine distribution.

My DM's physician mentioned it to me when we were in a few weeks ago and said that she would be in phase 1.

I googled this upon returning home and was able to find the group and the recommendation that was consistent with the physician's comments.

I believe it was the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine who are authoring the report.

-gauss

 

[CardsFan]

These vaccines prevent people from getting very sick, not from getting infected. Even the vaccinated can spread the disease. That is why 'herd immunity' is impossible. The human herd is not corralled, there will always be a significant portion that has not been vaccinated.

We all should continue to wear masks until all who don't wish to get sick have been vaccinated. The rest... well your choice, your consequences.

Oh, as someone mentioned there are several vaccines well along in testing. J&J has one that doesn't require refrigeration and reports I have heard is just as effective in preventing disease with one injection.

Do you have a cite for these claims?

 

[RetireBy90]

These vaccines prevent people from getting very sick, not from getting infected. Even the vaccinated can spread the disease. That is why 'herd immunity' is impossible. The human herd is not corralled, there will always be a significant portion that has not been vaccinated.

We all should continue to wear masks until all who don't wish to get sick have been vaccinated. The rest... well your choice, your consequences.

This hits on a question I haven’t heard or read enough to answer. If you have anti-bodies either from a recent infection or from a vaccine, and you come in contact with the virus, do the antibodies kill off the virus before you are “infected” or do you just recover rapidly ?
Forget COVID, if you get measles vaccine you don’t “catch” measles. Shouldn’t it be the same for COVID ?

 

[RetireBy90]

This hits on a question I haven’t heard or read enough to answer. If you have anti-bodies either from a recent infection or from a vaccine, and you come in contact with the virus, do the antibodies kill off the virus before you are “infected” or do you just recover rapidly ?
Forget COVID, if you get measles vaccine you don’t “catch” measles. Shouldn’t it be the same for COVID ?

Just watched a piece on CNBC that talked about this a bit. The subject was a doctor answering questions about the new treatment being approved and the Pfizer news.



The Dr talked about being able to get antibodies into the nose and throat where the virus enters the body and how difficult it is. I can't repeat all his points, he said there is a difference between a vaccine that gets the antibodies to throat and nose and antibodies that kills the invaders, and a vaccine that helps the body kill off the infection once it is in the body. So there is a difference between the infectious particles and the infection that they can produce. Different vaccines will have different effect on the 2 distinct problem areas.



This is to say there is validity to the point about a vaccine not keeping you from contracting the disease but preparing your immune system to defeat it once you have contracted it. Either way prevent or swift response it is an interesting topic.

 

[RetireBy90]

Just hearing news of another antibody approval from Lilly. Targeted to early in the disease and it is an infusion so it will be administered only by health care personnel.

From Lilly at https://investor.lilly.com/news-rel...-antibody-bamlanivimab-ly-cov555-receives-fda

INDIANAPOLIS, Nov. 9, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) today granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for Eli Lilly and Company's (NYSE: LLY) investigational neutralizing antibody bamlanivimab (LY-CoV555) 700 mg. Bamlanivimab is authorized for the treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19 in adults and pediatric patients 12 years and older with a positive COVID-19 test, who are at high risk for progressing to severe COVID-19 and/or hospitalization. Bamlanivimab should be administered as soon as possible after a positive COVID-19 test and within 10 days of symptom onset. The authorization allows for the distribution and emergency use of bamlanivimab, which is administered via a single intravenous infusion.

More great news, but the name, what is up with that

 

[audreyh1]

Bamlanivimab: Well the terminal mab part of the name indicates that it is a monoclonal antibody. Can’t say much for the rest of it. I’m not sure I can even say that!

So that’s a treatment rather than a preventative (not a vaccine). From what I’m reading monoclonal antibodies are difficult to produce in large quantities.

 

[RetireBy90]

Bamlanivimab: Well the terminal mab part of the name indicates that it is a monoclonal antibody. Can’t say much for the rest of it. I’m not sure I can even say that!


So that’s a treatment rather than a preventative (not a vaccine). From what I’m reading monoclonal antibodies are difficult to produce in large quantities.

Talking heads are asking how to distribute limited quantities, to your 2d point.

I heard you have to be able to pronounce the name correctly before administration as a way to ration the limited quantities - JOKING

On Pfizer, HHS Secretary just on said the contract with Pfizer is for 20M doses a month. He expects to have enough to be doing general population by March/April, with Pfizer and other vaccines combined. Also stated that the individual governors will be responsible or deciding where treatments and vaccines are sent.

 

[Amethyst]

I'd pronounce bam-lan-i-vi-mab with the same cadence as bop-bop-a-lu-bop (alop-bam-boom).

Bamlanivimab: Well the terminal mab part of the name indicates that it is a monoclonal antibody. Can’t say much for the rest of it. I’m not sure I can even say that!

So that’s a treatment rather than a preventative (not a vaccine). From what I’m reading monoclonal antibodies are difficult to produce in large quantities.

 

[Nemo2]

Me, I'd pronounce it Yabba Dabba Doo, since it might lead to being sur la rue encore.

 

[Gumby]

Bamlanivimab: Well the terminal mab part of the name indicates that it is a monoclonal antibody. Can’t say much for the rest of it. I’m not sure I can even say that!

So that’s a treatment rather than a preventative (not a vaccine). From what I’m reading monoclonal antibodies are difficult to produce in large quantities.

I think it just needs a cool number like "Cure 28". Seems to work for Product 19 cereal, 409 cleaner and WD-40.

 

[Brat]

Do you have a cite for these claims?

Yes, there is a YouTube/Podcast titled This Week in Virology hosted by a virologist at Columbia University who was a part of the development of the polio vaccine. Several other virologists and a physician converse, they post weekly - usually on a Sunday. Look for episode 675 from a couple of weeks back with the title that includes 'herd'. https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/.

 

[NW-Bound]

Me, I'd pronounce it Yabba Dabba Doo, since it might lead to being sur la rue encore.

Yabba Dabba Doo?? What language is that ??

 

[Gumby]

Yabba Dabba Doo?? What language is that ??

Flintstonian, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[MichaelB]

Flintstonian, if I'm not mistaken.

Yup. A leading example of the modern stone age genre.

 

[Nemo2]

Yabba Dabba Doo?? What language is that ??

Flintstonian:

 

[SecondCor521]

Question about multiple vaccines

Hi all.

Mods, feel free to fold this into another thread if it makes sense to do so.

I have a question about multiple coronavirus vaccines.

I'd like to be vaccinated against the coronavirus as best as I possibly can.

It is plausible to me that a situation may arise where the first available vaccine may not ultimately be judged to be the best vaccine. And this judgment will likely not be known for a while.

Is it a viable strategy to get the first available vaccine to be protected sooner, and then get the best vaccine later when that is generally known? Or does getting the first available vaccine somehow limit me from getting the best vaccine later - for whatever reason?

I thought there was sort of a similar situation with shingles vaccines, where the first one was good but the second one (Shingrix) was better. In my case the timing worked out OK, because by the time I needed a shingles vaccine, we already knew that Shingrix was better and so I just got that one. But had the timing been different, I might have gotten the first one instead, and I thought there was some sort of limitation where the people who got the first one had to wait or not get the Shingrix for a while or perhaps ever.

I know we don't know for certain because it's a new virus, but I'm interested in educated guesses from people who know more than I do about vaccines and viruses and stuff and can make inferences from what we do know.

Thank you.

 

[Alan]

Hi all.

Mods, feel free to fold this into another thread if it makes sense to do so.

I have a question about multiple coronavirus vaccines.

.

Done.

 

[Aerides]

Is it a viable strategy to get the first available vaccine to be protected sooner, and then get the best vaccine later when that is generally known? Or does getting the first available vaccine somehow limit me from getting the best vaccine later - for whatever reason?

I think we are a long way off from having to think about options. And I'm sure once the average consumer is in a position to make a decision our doctors will have that info.

Or even when only the first one is out of the gate, by the time any of us gets to roll up our sleeves there will be plenty of info on the one that's coming out second, and then if it's worth it to wait or not.

It could very likely be this becomes an annual/seasonal shot too, vs. one and done (or, two and done ala shingrix). But no one knows any of that with any certainty yet.

 

[sengsational]

The nurse that gave our regular flu vaccine mentioned that it wasn't a problem to mix the two shingles vaccines, which implied to me mixing might not always be approved.

If one were highly curious and/or adept at reading FDA applications, you could research whether the population used in the phase 3 for the newer shingles shot included people who had the earlier shot. That would indicate a higher bar for stacking vaccines, so make it a better strategic move to get a good Covid vaccine at the start. But except for who to blame or credit, my non-doctor opinion is that there wouldn't be any problem stacking; from my rudimentary knowledge of the mechanism, no likely harmful interactions. Good question.