Covid Vaccination Argentina

[gracielle]

30 June 2021

Despejan dudas sobre la efectividad de AstraZeneca: una dosis de la vacuna reduce sensiblemente las internaciones

Lo estudios fueron realizados en el Reino Unido, donde circula mayoritariamente la variante delta, reveló la patóloga argentina Marta Cohen. De todas formas, las investigaciones indicaron que una mejor protección reciben quienes tienen dos y hasta tres dosis

www.infobae.com

Clear doubts about the effectiveness of AstraZeneca: a dose of the vaccine significantly reduces hospitalizations. The studies were carried out in the UK, where the Delta variant mainly circulates, revealed the ARG pathologist, Marta Cohen, who lives in the UK. The research indicated that those who have two and up to three doses receive better protection....

30 June 2021

The EU vaccine 'passport' and what it means for travel

An EU vaccine "passport" is being introduced, enabling holders to prove they have been jabbed.

www.bbc.com

 

[gracielle]

Actualized 30 June 2021 at 1:17pm

Estados Unidos confirmó la donación de vacunas: cuántas y cuáles llegarán al país

Funcionarios norteamericanos precisaron la partida precisa correspondiente a un primer lote de 6 millones destinado a América latina. Para concretar el desembarco, resta la aprobación de la Anmat.

www.cronista.com

BIDEN GESTURE. The US confirmed the donation of vaccines: how many and which will arrive in the country. North American officials specified the precise item corresponding to a first batch of 6 million destined for Latin America. To finalize the landing, it remains to receive the approval of the ANMAT....
....El Cronista learned from officials involved in the negotiations, that the Biden administration will donate 2,300,000 doses to the country, which will be distributed through the Covax mechanism, WHO and the Alliance for Vaccination (GAVI), in the course of July and August. The vaccines provided by the US to ARG represent something like 12% of the first delivery, taking as a parameter that the country entered the indirect distribution of 19 million of the first 25, while other countries considered allies will receive the remainder of 6 millions directly and without the intermediation of the multilateral mechanism sponsored by the UN. The US government has committed the distribution, through Covax, of doses manufactured by the laboratories Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson. Injections from the Anglo-Swedish laboratory AstraZeneca, whose authorization for home use was not granted by the Federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA), will not be part of the delivery.

 

[Alby]

30 June 2021

Despejan dudas sobre la efectividad de AstraZeneca: una dosis de la vacuna reduce sensiblemente las internaciones

Lo estudios fueron realizados en el Reino Unido, donde circula mayoritariamente la variante delta, reveló la patóloga argentina Marta Cohen. De todas formas, las investigaciones indicaron que una mejor protección reciben quienes tienen dos y hasta tres dosis

www.infobae.com

Clear doubts about the effectiveness of AstraZeneca: a dose of the vaccine significantly reduces hospitalizations. The studies were carried out in the UK, where the Delta variant mainly circulates, revealed the ARG pathologist, Marta Cohen, who lives in the UK. The research indicated that those who have two and up to three doses receive better protection....

30 June 2021

The EU vaccine 'passport' and what it means for travel

An EU vaccine "passport" is being introduced, enabling holders to prove they have been jabbed.

www.bbc.com

It's all quite reassuring yet clear as mud. These journalists throw these reports together very carelessly.

It mentions the Public Health England study which showed 33% effectiveness of AZ against symptoms of Delta after one dose. I had seen a news report about that same study that did not mention new information that InfoBAE is now adding: 72% effectiveness against hospitalization for Delta after one dose. There is some discrepancy between the first report I read and this new InfoBAE report: the first said that all the subjects of the study had received one dose of AZ (indeed it said the purpose of the study was to measure the results of one dose of AZ) whereas this InforBAE report of the same study says indicates the subjects of the study were cases of the virus regardless of whether they were vaccinated or not and regardless of the number of doses.

Also, this InfoBAE article starts out by saying recent studies by Oxford University show the 72% effectiveness after one dose against hospitalization for Delta. What were these recent studies by Oxford University? The article doesn't say. It leaves the impression that they are not published studies, simply internal Oxford studies the results of which Dr Pollard verbally reported to Dr Cohen and Dr Cohen reported to the journalist and the journalist is reporting to the reader. It is interesting that the figure of 72% coincides exactly with the figure apparently arising from the Public Health England study.

And what are we to make of this: El doctor Pollard, agregó Cohen, “me explica que en su trabajo llamaron a los voluntarios que no habían recibido la segunda dosis”, tras lo cual tuvieron “la grata sorpresa de que hasta 45 semanas después o más de la primera dosis, la segunda dosis presentaba una buena inmunidad. Esto es por la memoria inmunológica”.

In the first place, who were the volunteers vaccinated 45 weeks ago? They can only have been the initial trial volunteers. Is the article saying that we can wait as long as 45 weeks after the first dose before the second dose without compromising our immunity?

Finally, the report mentions a third study (a second published study) in the Lancet apparently three days ago which also appears to show that lengthening the gap between the first and second dose leads to a stronger result after the second dose. OK, but how long? The 84 days we are being told to wait here in Argentina? Or six months? Or 45 weeks?

 

[on the brink]

Finally, the report mentions a third study (a second published study) in the Lancet apparently three days ago which also appears to show that lengthening the gap between the first and second dose leads to a stronger result after the second dose. OK, but how long? The 84 days we are being told to wait here in Argentina? Or six months? Or 45 weeks?

Am afraid at this point no one knows for sure what the vaccines do or don't do, or how the virus works. The majority of studies and articles sound like more or less educated guesswork.

 

[gracielle]

....Finally, the report mentions a third study (a second published study) in the Lancet apparently three days ago which also appears to show that lengthening the gap between the first and second dose leads to a stronger result after the second dose....

Published: June 28, 2021....The Lancet

DEFINE_ME

[/URL]

July 1, 202 at 11:12 AM -03....Last Updated 5 hours ago

Public Health England: AstraZeneca COVID shot 94% protective against death in over 65s

Two doses of the Oxford/AstraZeneca (AZN.L) COVID-19 vaccine gives an estimated 94% protection against death from the disease in people over 65, Public Health England said on Thursday in a weekly surveillance report of real-world data.

www.reuters.com

 

[FrankPintor]

This is a good read: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...trials-and-tribulations-of-a-world-saving-jab. Lots of background information, plus it explains one of the stranger trial results:

"When the trials reported, it turned out that volunteers given a half-dose followed by a full dose got more protection – up to 90%, compared with 62%.

And the Oxford/AstraZeneca explanation of the 90% efficacy turned out to be wrong. Those who got the lower doses also had a bigger gap between the two shots. That, it turned out, was what improved the outcome. As we know now, a strategy of delaying the second dose paid off in the UK, but it was unorthodox".

And for those of us who are, well, invested in AZ, and now at risk of Stockholm Syndrome (or buyer's remorse, take your pick), there's this reassurance:

"Adding the very latest data pushed the overall efficacy down from 79% to 76%, which was barely a drop, and actually pushed up efficacy in the older age group from 80% to 85%"

Nobody is going to be happy waiting 45 weeks for a 2nd dose, but 12 weeks seems manageable.

For those of us who were vaccinated in CABA, there is now an additional worry, there are reports that CABA wants to mix and match first and second doses. I need hardly add that the medical justification for this is very sketchy, we're just now understanding what happens with 2 AZ doses, and a very long way from understanding what happens with 2 doses of different vaccines. Anyone who reads me knows my opinion of CABA's medical/political game playing, so I'll just leave it at that.

 

[lunar]

For those of us who were vaccinated in CABA, there is now an additional worry, there are reports that CABA wants to mix and match first and second doses.

Since Astrazeneca is kind of locally made, I believe it is much more likely that Astrazeneca will be available 12 weeks from now, than, for example, Pfizer. So, they will not have to mix and match.

 

[gracielle]

1 July 2021 at 3:49am

Qué piensa el infectólogo Roberto Debbag sobre la combinación de vacunas

El médico se mostró optimista y aseguró que, en algunas semanas, el mundo contará con nuevos estudios; además, dijo con seguridad que no existe riesgo grave al recibir distintas dosis

www.lanacion.com.ar

What infectologist Roberto Debbag, the vice president of the Latin American Society of Pediatric Infectology, thinks about the combination of vaccines. The physician was optimistic and assured that, in a few weeks, the world will have new studies; in addition, he said with certainty that there is no serious risk when receiving different doses.

He analyzed the global panorama of the vaccination campaign against Covid-19 and referred to recent studies on the combination of vaccines from different laboratories. “There are three groups that are studying some of the combinations, one is Oxford, and possibly in the second week of August there will be the data of the combination of AstraZeneca and Sputnik. In the United States, there are other combinations as well. Another was published in Spain, with a combination of Pfizer and AstraZeneca. For Sputnik we only have the potential Oxford study, that is why the need to have these studies in Argentina ”....

....Along these lines, he highlighted the importance of conducting linear studies in ARG in order to accelerate the vaccination campaign. “The prospects for vaccine arrivals are very good. If we now have AstraZeneca vaccines available and more Sinopharm vaccines arrive, immediately we must carry out studies that consist of applying a dose of AstraZeneca or Sinopharm to those who have already received the first and studying immunity after 21 days ”....

 

[antipodean]

It's all quite reassuring yet clear as mud. These journalists throw these reports together very carelessly.

It mentions the Public Health England study which showed 33% effectiveness of AZ against symptoms of Delta after one dose. I had seen a news report about that same study that did not mention new information that InfoBAE is now adding: 72% effectiveness against hospitalization for Delta after one dose. There is some discrepancy between the first report I read and this new InfoBAE report: the first said that all the subjects of the study had received one dose of AZ (indeed it said the purpose of the study was to measure the results of one dose of AZ) whereas this InforBAE report of the same study says indicates the subjects of the study were cases of the virus regardless of whether they were vaccinated or not and regardless of the number of doses.

Also, this InfoBAE article starts out by saying recent studies by Oxford University show the 72% effectiveness after one dose against hospitalization for Delta. What were these recent studies by Oxford University? The article doesn't say. It leaves the impression that they are not published studies, simply internal Oxford studies the results of which Dr Pollard verbally reported to Dr Cohen and Dr Cohen reported to the journalist and the journalist is reporting to the reader. It is interesting that the figure of 72% coincides exactly with the figure apparently arising from the Public Health England study.

And what are we to make of this: El doctor Pollard, agregó Cohen, “me explica que en su trabajo llamaron a los voluntarios que no habían recibido la segunda dosis”, tras lo cual tuvieron “la grata sorpresa de que hasta 45 semanas después o más de la primera dosis, la segunda dosis presentaba una buena inmunidad. Esto es por la memoria inmunológica”.

In the first place, who were the volunteers vaccinated 45 weeks ago? They can only have been the initial trial volunteers. Is the article saying that we can wait as long as 45 weeks after the first dose before the second dose without compromising our immunity?

Finally, the report mentions a third study (a second published study) in the Lancet apparently three days ago which also appears to show that lengthening the gap between the first and second dose leads to a stronger result after the second dose. OK, but how long? The 84 days we are being told to wait here in Argentina? Or six months? Or 45 weeks?

In regards to Delta, I think the guts of what they are trying to get at is that one dose still offers most individuals good protection against ending up in hospital or worse. However, one dose offers the individual far less protection against getting infected than two doses. The reason infection of the individual matters is that they risk still passing it on to other people even if asymptomatic. Given the Delta is more contagious, it will ultimately find more people to infect and as a result make people severely ill (or worse) much faster than other strains would, jeopardising health care systems. We need to remember that society is still mostly unprotected by vaccines and many vulnerable people "recently" vaccinated may still have not have developed optimal levels of protection.

For example I was reading the following news (Эффективность "Спутника" против штамма "дельта"/ Efficiency of Sputnik against Delta) that says: ...a decrease in the ability of antibodies to "stick" to the virus, says Tatyana Dudnakova, Ph.D. at the School of Biological Sciences at the University of Edinburgh. "That is, we need twice as many antibodies," she says.
According to her, the protection of Sputnik from severe illness when infected with the Indian strain is close to 90%, from a moderate one - about 80%, but with regard to a mild illness it is already lower - there is about 70%, and about 50% efficiency from an asymptomatic one.
"As expected, the Delta strain requires more antibodies, it can penetrate the defense, but the vaccine is still effective, the virus is recognized and destroyed," says Dudnakova.

Anecdotally to support the fact those with vaccines are still at risk of getting sick, I now know two people who have had the first dose of Sputnik and ended up in hospital with COVID, one sadly in a grave condition, and also a third with both doses also in hospital in a moderate condition.

In regards to mixing and matching it is something the government appear to be taking seriously as something to study following health minister Vizzotti's comments 8 days ago:

El Gobierno convocó a especialistas para analizar si se pueden combinar las vacunas contra el coronavirus

Es parte de la estrategia para acelerar la aplicación de la segunda dosis debido a la preocupación por el avance de la variante Delta

www.infobae.com

Russia also appears to be stepping up its research and focus on offering Sputnik as a complementary vaccines to combine with others.

 

[FrankPintor]

Since Astrazeneca is kind of locally made, I believe it is much more likely that Astrazeneca will be available 12 weeks from now, than, for example, Pfizer. So, they will not have to mix and match.

Argentina expects to be awash with vaccines this month, some 14 million doses are expected, 8 million of which would be Sinopharm. So I don't see a justification for mixing and matching, and I certainly hope you're right.