# UK approves AstraZeneca / Oxford vaccine



## x65943 (Dec 30, 2020)

The UK has approved the AstraZeneca / Oxford vaccine.

This vaccine is a more traditional variety created from a deficient Chimpanzee adenovirus and the Covid-19 spike protein.

Crucially, this more typical vaccine can be stored in a normal refrigerator and will thus be easier to administer in poorer countries without access to super cold freezers.

The USA and EU are not likely to approve the vaccine in the immediate future as there is still some question as to the most effective dose. Early analysis had shown a half dose followed by a full dose to be more effective than two full doses. The UK has approved only two administrations of a full dose.

So what do you guys think? Would you be more likely to trust this more traditional vaccine vector? Do you think the UK jumped the gun on approving this new vaccine? Do you think they did this for fear of the new rapidly spreading covid variant in the UK? And finally, isn't it interesting the UK keeps approving these vaccines before anyone else?

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN2940KS


----------



## Deleted member 473940 (Dec 30, 2020)

If I recall correctly, the intial results were 60% effective?

Apparently the UK government thinks thats good enough...


----------



## x65943 (Dec 30, 2020)

MrShawnTRods said:


> If I recall correctly, the intial results were 60% effective?
> 
> Apparently the UK government thinks thats good enough...


Apparently it is about 80% effective with two full doses 3 months apart.

It's not perfect, but it's better than nothing - and if everyone got the vaccine and it was 80% effective that would probably be enough to halt transmission entirely. And even if it wasn't, that combined with other more effective vaccines in the general population would surely be enough to halt transmission.


----------



## Veho (Dec 30, 2020)

A lot of people have doubts about the new vaccines and will be more likely to trust the more traditional technology, and get vaccinated. 
But more importantly, this vaccine can be stored at refrigerator temperature, so the distribution and storage won't be as complex and expensive as with the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines; and the Oxford vaccine is _significantly _cheaper than the mRNA vaccines, making it more accessible to many. 
So if it gets approved globally, that would be great.


----------



## leon315 (Dec 30, 2020)

SO THE 95% of effectiveness claim by Pfizer is a *Hoax???*


----------



## x65943 (Dec 30, 2020)

leon315 said:


> SO THE 95% of effectiveness claim by Pfizer is a *Hoax???*


This is a different vaccine entirely


----------



## leon315 (Dec 30, 2020)

x65943 said:


> This is a different vaccine entirely


I MEANT the statistics announced by Pfizer was too good to be real.


----------



## Veho (Dec 30, 2020)

leon315 said:


> I MEANT the statistics announced by Pfizer was too good to be real.


No. It's a different vaccine, using a different approach, different biological mechanism of achieving immunity, so the effectiveness is different.


----------



## x65943 (Dec 30, 2020)

leon315 said:


> I MEANT the statistics announced by Pfizer was too good to be real.


How so? Care to give any details?

Pfizer's vaccine is still thought to be around 95% effective. 

This is a separate vaccine made by a separate group with a separate mechanism and thus separate results.


----------



## leon315 (Dec 30, 2020)

x65943 said:


> How so? Care to give any details?
> 
> Pfizer's vaccine is still thought to be around 95% effective.
> 
> This is a separate vaccine made by a separate group with a separate mechanism and thus separate results.


Pfizer's vaccine compared to any other ones (Russian or Chinese ones) took roughly only 6 months to develop, every process was rushed to make it to the public ASAP, thus lakes very important *mass *_*Clinic tests and confirmation, the data to back their claims is limited none of us are sure the real effectiveness and the direct negative consequences through the long term.
*_
I'm not one of those anti-vaxxers fortunately, but seriously don't trust those Pharmaceutic company like Pfizer for the reasons you probably already know.

P.s. italy has begun Pfizer's vaccination campaign today, medics are those receive 1st vaccine, but seems huge negativeness are receiving among many nurses, nearly 60% of doctors and nurses refused to Pfizer's vaccine.


----------



## x65943 (Dec 30, 2020)

leon315 said:


> Pfizer's vaccine compared to any other ones (Russian or Chinese ones) took roughly only 6 months to develop, every process was rushed to make it to the public ASAP, thus lakes very important *mass *_*Clinic tests and confirmation, the data to back their claims is limited none of us are sure the real effectiveness and the direct negative consequences through the long term.
> *_
> I'm not one of those anti-vaxxers fortunately, but seriously don't trust those Pharmaceutic company like Pfizer for the reasons you probably already know.
> 
> P.s. italy has begun Pfizer's vaccination campaign today, medics are those receive 1st vaccine, but seems huge negativeness are receiving among many nurses, nearly 60% of doctors and nurses refused to Pfizer's vaccine.


I mean I agree the process was really fast, but I don't know why you brought up pfizer in this thread at all - it's off topic and the efficacy of the AstraZeneca vaccine is not related to the efficacy of the pfizer vaccine in any way.


----------



## leon315 (Dec 30, 2020)

I expected the topic on comparison about *real effectiveness *of various upcoming vaccines, since this is will major break point of this historical event.


----------



## Taleweaver (Dec 31, 2020)

Erm...I guess it's good to have a backup, but who would want an 80% effective vaccine if the pfizer vaccine is 95% effective? IIRC, the latter also has the second shot 3 weeks later, so you're both faster and better protected.
...but I presume this vaccine is stored at room temperature? That at least would be an advantage.

@leon315 : so...do you have an actual opinion on AstraZeneca or are you just here to derail the thread?

Still...okay, okay: I'll bite:


leon315 said:


> P.s. italy has begun Pfizer's vaccination campaign today, medics are those receive 1st vaccine, but seems huge negativeness are receiving among many nurses, nearly 60% of doctors and nurses refused to Pfizer's vaccine.


Any source on this? I googled, but the best I could come up with was this piece that mentions _around 100 medics were unwilling to receive the immunisation, adding that vaccine scepticism was “incompatible with the profession because it denied the scientific evidence_.
You're not telling me that Italy has less than 200 people working in the medical sector, right? 

EDIT: ...but to circle around back on topic: do you think this vaccine (AstraZeneca) be more scientifically proven, and thus met with less criticism?


----------



## Silent_Gunner (Dec 31, 2020)

I'd say I'd trust this more than the mRNA vax that Moderna and Pfizer is from the reading I've done...but honestly? Considering I've probably been exposed to the virus already, and that taking the vaccine apparently doesn't get rid of the need for masks, I really have to wonder what the incentive of getting the vaccine is for someone like myself who was completely asymptomatic, immune, or whatever the fuck at this point. I know, there's more strains of the virus, but I just am not scared of this virus in regards to my own health.

I know, "but it's about keeping others safe!"

Here's something to consider: there's a pretty large majority of people in first world nations who work jobs that require their physical presence, and where, depending on the environment, people either take this virus seriously because they're told to and don't stand up for themselves, or they only wear it when necessary, and put it off to the side for most of the day.

I mean, what's next? You can't go outside because one might have allergies? Or that you could get mauled by a bear? Or your nether regions crushed by deer?

If everyone was that deathly afraid back in the Hunter-gatherer days, humanity's existence would only be fossilized.


----------



## Deleted User (Dec 31, 2020)

There is a new outbreak in New South Wales which has spread to Victoria. Australia doesn't intend to approve a vaccine until March. While the coronavirus was limited to quarantined patients we had the luxury of waiting. Now that it's out in the wild again we need to approve a vaccine for emergency use and start vaccinating the vulnerable as soon as possible.

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/austral...eak-rises-to-six-and-nsw-reports-10-new-cases


----------



## notimp (Dec 31, 2020)

koohiiwonomimasu69 said:


> There is a new outbreak in New South Whales which has spread to Victoria. Australia doesn't intend to approve a vaccine until March. While the coronavirus was limited to quarantined patients we had the luxury of waiting. Now that it's out in the wild again we need to approve a vaccine for emergency use and start vaccinating the vulnerable as soon as possible.
> 
> Source: https://www.theguardian.com/austral...eak-rises-to-six-and-nsw-reports-10-new-cases


Ehm...







Peak was at below 700 a day - which is nothing. Population density in Australia is ehm... low, you dont have winters... Ehm...

FOMO?

I mean, at its peak, Australia had 60 deaths a day, and now it has 4. Germany has 1000. US has 4000.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Dec 31, 2020)

vaccine is useless now anyway the virus has mutated!

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



koohiiwonomimasu69 said:


> There is a new outbreak in New South Whales which has spread to Victoria


yeah fucking NSW and Victoria always ruining everything


----------



## Lucifer666 (Dec 31, 2020)

Bladexdsl said:


> vaccine is useless now anyway the virus has mutated!


That's not how any of this works.


----------



## Deleted User (Dec 31, 2020)

Silent_Gunner said:


> I'd say I'd trust this more than the mRNA vax that Moderna and Pfizer is from the reading I've done...but honestly? Considering I've probably been exposed to the virus already, and that taking the vaccine apparently doesn't get rid of the need for masks, I really have to wonder what the incentive of getting the vaccine is for someone like myself who was completely asymptomatic, immune, or whatever the fuck at this point. I know, there's more strains of the virus, but I just am not scared of this virus in regards to my own health.
> 
> I know, "but it's about keeping others safe!"
> 
> ...


I think you have a personal bias against getting vaccinated and you only use logic when you seek to rationalise your behaviour. Your logic is flawed too.

You previously claimed the vaccine causes infertility in females without checking the validity of the claim. The comment above yours had already provided evidence proving the claim is false.

Source: https://gbatemp.net/threads/covid-19-vaccine.579062/page-2#post-9300058

Next you cited the incident where Tiffany Dover fainted minutes after receiving the vaccine. This was caused by a medical condition she has which sometimes causes her to faint when she feels paint, not the vaccine. QAnan Twitter accounts are not a reliable source of information.

Source: https://gbatemp.net/threads/covid-19-vaccine.579062/page-4#post-9300288
Source: https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-afs:Content:9817674811

The Economist estimates that only 18-24% of Americans have been infected with the coronavirus. While I don't know which state you live in or whether you have been in close contact with positive cases, it's likely that rather than being 100% asymptomatic, you never got infected.

To read past the paywall view the page source and search for the string "this week".
Source: https://www.economist.com/graphic-d...mericans-may-have-been-infected-with-covid-19

When you get into a car wearing a seatbelt does not change the fact you might die. You wear one anyway because it is the safer option.


notimp said:


> Ehm...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Fact remains, people die of the coronavirus. The New South Wales outbreak is growing and the Victorian outbreak is likely to follow suit. We can minimise further deaths by vaccinating the vulnerable sooner rather than later. Let's not forget long-covid.


Bladexdsl said:


> vaccine is useless now anyway the virus has mutated!


This is false information. The vaccines available are highly likely to work on the mutated forms and can be updated as necessary.

Source: https://www.wkyc.com/article/news/v...rains/65-8734e2a6-a18f-49ab-b2b5-6d198da45782
Source: https://abc7news.com/health/scientists-monitoring-covid-19-variant-for-impact-on-vaccines/9188274/


----------



## notimp (Dec 31, 2020)

koohiiwonomimasu69 said:


> Fact remains, people die of the coronavirus. The New South Wales outbreak is growing and the Victorian outbreak is likely to follow suit. We can minimise further deaths by vaccinating the vulnerable sooner rather than later. Let's not forget long-covid.


Sure. But thats not what drives your countries vaccine approvement, or procurement procedures.

And actually for your country not moving into 70% of your population (x2) mass procurement at the moment might actually be whats needed world wide at the moment.

https://www.health.gov.au/ministers...purchase-covid-19-vaccine-doses-through-covax


----------



## Taleweaver (Dec 31, 2020)

Silent_Gunner said:


> I'd say I'd trust this more than the mRNA vax that Moderna and Pfizer is from the reading I've done...but honestly? Considering I've probably been exposed to the virus already, and that taking the vaccine apparently doesn't get rid of the need for masks, I really have to wonder what the incentive of getting the vaccine is for someone like myself who was completely asymptomatic, immune, or whatever the fuck at this point. I know, there's more strains of the virus, but I just am not scared of this virus in regards to my own health.


Let me get this straight: you assume you've been exposed to the virus because your personal reasoning, and take that as proof that you're either asymptomatic or immune (or "whatever the fuck"). You build on that assumption by saying there is no incentive for you because you still have to wear a mask afterwards. Erm...let me tackle the latter first: the vaccine doesn't turn you into an anti-covid machine. If you get in contact with the virus, it can still reside on your body. Your antibodies will still need to fight it (though it'd be much easier for them). So as such, you can still infect others.
But really...I think it's mostly a solidarity measure. It'll take time before everyone (who wants to) gets vaccinated, and if vaccinated people will walk around without masks in that time, it'll just get others the idea that it's safer than it really is (besides...80 or 95% chance is still below 100).



Silent_Gunner said:


> Here's something to consider: there's a pretty large majority of people in first world nations who work jobs that require their physical presence, and where, depending on the environment, people either take this virus seriously because they're told to and don't stand up for themselves, or they only wear it when necessary, and put it off to the side for most of the day.


They...put the virus off to the side for most of the day? I don't think you wrote what you meant to say there. 

In case you meant "face masks" by the "it", then the response is simple: you're dead wrong. My girlfriend works in the hospital. They don't need reminders, and aren't wearing those "because they're told to and don't stand up for themselves", but it's because most if not everyone there has seen people die of the complications.
I personally work for a multinational with many stores. At least two had to close down because of covid measures. And even if it wasn't for that, it's a direct influx on our income (we're about to fire 100+ people). Because of that, most people know at least some others who have gotten seriously ill. So...with all due respect, but take your "people don't stand up for themselves" opinion and shove it where the sun doesn't shine(1). 



(1): it's of course my opinion, but whenever someone talks about people being "sheep" or needing to "stand up for themselves", it's always used as a justification for breaking rules. Basically: it's saying "don't follow that crowd, you sheep! Follow MY opinion instead".


----------



## leon315 (Dec 31, 2020)

Taleweaver said:


> Erm...I guess it's good to have a backup, but who would want an 80% effective vaccine if the pfizer vaccine is 95% effective? IIRC, the latter also has the second shot 3 weeks later, so you're both faster and better protected.
> ...but I presume this vaccine is stored at room temperature? That at least would be an advantage.
> 
> @leon315 : so...do you have an actual opinion on AstraZeneca or are you just here to derail the thread?
> ...


The truth is there are only 100s medics resulted in the news cauz they are from one of the most relevant and influential Hospital in Italy thus only very small portion of doctors are caught in the spotlight.

the reason? many preferred to stay anonymous since Govt. passed law about mandatory vaccination for all employed hospital medical staffs, who intentionally rejects vaccine will be fired.


----------



## Silent_Gunner (Dec 31, 2020)

Taleweaver said:


> Let me get this straight: you assume you've been exposed to the virus because your personal reasoning, and take that as proof that you're either asymptomatic or immune (or "whatever the fuck"). You build on that assumption by saying there is no incentive for you because you still have to wear a mask afterwards. Erm...let me tackle the latter first: the vaccine doesn't turn you into an anti-covid machine. If you get in contact with the virus, it can still reside on your body. Your antibodies will still need to fight it (though it'd be much easier for them). So as such, you can still infect others.
> But really...I think it's mostly a solidarity measure. It'll take time before everyone (who wants to) gets vaccinated, and if vaccinated people will walk around without masks in that time, it'll just get others the idea that it's safer than it really is (besides...80 or 95% chance is still below 100).
> 
> 
> ...



Ah, putting words in my mouth. I never said sheep anywhere in my post. I'm sure the ACLU, and the SPLC would love that kind of accusatory dialogue.

And no, I don't work in a hospital. Some of us here in America take Benjamin Franklin's words about those who'd trade freedom for a little security not being deserving of it a little more seriously than your feelings. Like I think I said, some of us have bills that aren't just gonna magically disappear if we had stopped working, food to put on the table, and some had good careers before the governments that claimed to know better destroyed all that they worked towards.

I mean, where's the outrage for the people who've committed suicide because of this pandemic on this fucking site, huh? No, it's all about the anti-vaxxers, the right, the religious, the people that even an agnostic like myself can see a clear bias towards, which I'm not surprised by considering I looked up and saw some people here also browse the Human Centipede known as Reddit.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



koohiiwonomimasu69 said:


> I think you have a personal bias against getting vaccinated and you only use logic when you seek to rationalise your behaviour. Your logic is flawed too.
> 
> You previously claimed the vaccine causes infertility in females without checking the validity of the claim. The comment above yours had already provided evidence proving the claim is false.
> 
> ...



Ah, yes, prosecutor. Because clearly, you can infer one's opinion on a site based on a few posts, and ignore the nuance I put into them that, if you actually read what was said, you'd know I'm not anti-vax at all.

Also, thanks for showing you have no life, job, or any meaningful responsibilities by digging up people's old posts.


----------



## Deleted User (Dec 31, 2020)

Silent_Gunner said:


> Ah, yes, prosecutor. Because clearly, you can infer one's opinion on a site based on a few posts, and ignore the nuance I put into them that, if you actually read what was said, you'd know I'm not anti-vax at all.
> 
> Also, thanks for showing you have no life, job, or any meaningful responsibilities by digging up people's old posts.


By getting defensive and using ad hominem attacks you're providing more evidence to support my claim.


----------



## Silent_Gunner (Dec 31, 2020)

koohiiwonomimasu69 said:


> By getting defensive and using ad hominem attacks you're providing more evidence to support my claim.



Oh yes, because that's how evidence works now. 

Can anyone answer if this thing is an mRNA based vaccine, or are they too busy circlejerking each other over Joe Biden being declared president by the media?


----------



## x65943 (Jan 1, 2021)

India and Argentina have now also approved the AstraZeneca / Oxford vaccine

https://www.reuters.com/article/reutersComService_2_MOLT/idUSKBN296292



Silent_Gunner said:


> Oh yes, because that's how evidence works now.
> 
> Can anyone answer if this thing is an mRNA based vaccine, or are they too busy circlejerking each other over Joe Biden being declared president by the media?



This vaccine as stated in the first post is a traditional vaccine not utilizing recombinant mRNA technology


----------



## subcon959 (Jan 1, 2021)

I think it's the best shot we've got right now and feels like a necessary step in the right direction.

Here's some info direct from the company if anyone's interested:



> AZD1222 was co-invented by the University of Oxford and its spin-out company, Vaccitech. It uses a replication-deficient chimpanzee viral vector based on a weakened version of a common cold virus (adenovirus) that causes infections in chimpanzees and contains the genetic material of the SARS-CoV-2 virus spike protein. After vaccination, the surface spike protein is produced, priming the immune system to attack the SARS-CoV-2 virus if it later infects the body.
> 
> The interim analysis for efficacy was based on 11,636 participants accruing 131 symptomatic infections from the UK and Brazil Phase III trials conducted by Oxford University. As announced on 23 November 2020, the primary efficacy endpoint based on a pooled analysis showed that the vaccine was 70.4% (confidence interval: 54.8% to 80.6%) effective at preventing symptomatic COVID-19 occurring more than 14 days after receiving two doses of the vaccine. A secondary efficacy endpoint of prevention of severe disease demonstrated no cases of severe infections or hospitalisations in the vaccine group.
> 
> The safety data published so far is from over 20,000 participants enrolled across four clinical trials in the UK and Brazil and South Africa. _The Lancet _publication confirmed that AZD1222 was well tolerated and that there were no serious safety events confirmed related to the vaccine. The participants were from diverse racial and geographic groups who are healthy or have stable underlying medical conditions. This analysis provides safety data on 74,341 person-months of follow-up after first dose (median 3.4 months) and 29,060 person-months of follow-up after two doses (median 2.0 months). The overall reported rates of serious adverse events were 0.7% in the vaccine group and 0.8% in the control group.


----------



## Deleted User (Jan 5, 2021)

Everyone is making their own vaccine, eh.

However, cancer is still uncurable.


----------



## KingVamp (Jan 5, 2021)

Unless something really bad happens, I'm sure mRNA is the future for vaccines. Well, at least for the richer countries.


----------



## x65943 (Jan 5, 2021)

Boesy said:


> Everyone is making their own vaccine, eh.
> 
> However, cancer is still uncurable.


A lot of cancer is curable

The issue with curing "cancer" is it is an umbrella term that encompasses hundreds of diseases 

So here we are chasing after each form of cancer slowly and naturally we cure some types but there are many more left

Look into PDL-1 inhibitors for a solid breakthrough in many types of cancer

We have a long way to go but there is a lot of promise

Now the thing about vaccines is they are very simple (mechanistically) so of course everyone is jumping on board to make em, if cancer could be cured as easily everyone would be doing that


----------



## tooknie (Jan 5, 2021)

subcon959 said:


> I think it's the best shot we've got right now



No pun intended...


----------

