exp

So 30% of attendees of a night club get infected in a single night.

Repeat for a couple of weeks and that's about 2000 infections. If only a fraction of those are hospitalized, not so bad.

But who knows.

exp

BTW, the Israelis are reportedly saying 64% efficacy for fully vaccinated (Pfizer) vs. the delta variant.

Quite a bit less than what the PHE found.

Silver Fox

So?

wilsnunn

Maybe because they only vaccinated three weeks apart?

doctoravios

Yes, three weeks is far too short. Anyone who only had a three week interval between doses will likely need another booster to drive the same immunological memory which would be generated from 2 doses spaced 2-3 months apart (as the UK recommended).

I imagine Pfizer were well aware of this before they designed their trial and will have recognised the potential revenue benefits in upselling to 3 doses per recipient rather than just 2.

dnbn

They were vaccinated earlier than in other countries. Perhaps there is some decline in protection over time.

Owenc

Isn’t that what most Americans have had?

GloballyServiced

No, the authorities only have the health and safety of people in mind. Not money or power. Definitely.

wilsnunn

It has been mentioned on other threads that Pfizer (and other pharmaceutical companies) likely chose 3-4 weeks so as to speed up the trial and get the vaccine available as soon as possible. If the period has been set to 8 weeks, the trial would have lasted significantly longer and many many more deaths would have occurred.

exp

No they went through multiple phases.

I know they experimented with different doses and Pfizer had more than one candidate.

The earlier trials established the dosing regimen and Phase 3 showed efficacy.

doctoravios

Not necessarily. The UK has shown that spreading out the doses (which enabled more people to receive a first dose earlier) has proved beneficial. Yes, the trial endpoint would have been delayed by 8 weeks but it is quite possible that this could have been offset by better outcomes subsequently if the emergency authorisation had a delay of 2-3 months between doses.

The Pfizer trials did not, however, establish the optimal delay between doses. AstraZeneca were able to analyse this in subgroup analyses because of variable timing between 1st and 2nd dose which showed delaying the 2nd dose produces a more robust reponse. This is nothing new. We know from other vaccines that increasing the delay between prime and boost generally leads to better immune responses.

Yes, and I think this was the wrong approach. Delaying the 2nd dose would have enabled more people to receive first doses (which we know will still have good effectiveness and would have likely saved more lives) and then support better immune responses to the 2nd dose by leaving enough time for immunological memory to develop.

Fredrik74

Don't you mean this?


That doesn't say anything about infection.

NewbieRunner

14-day COVID-19 case notification rate per 100 000 population, weeks 25-26 (ECDC - map produced on 7 July 2021)



Geographic distribution of COVID-19 : 14-day COVID-19 case notification rate per 100 000, worldwide, weeks 25-26 (date of production 7July 2021)

lobo411

This is really quite simple:

The Israeli study counted "efficacy" as the prevention of *any* form of infection: symptomatic or not. 64% effective, which is, quite frankly, excellent.

The UK study counted "efficacy" as the prevention of hospitalization and death. ~90% efficacy, which is also excellent.

Silver Fox

What you are patently missing is that this does not fit the doom and gloom brigade narrative. I shall only issue one warning as to your future conduct before elevating it to a "frosty stare" condition.