• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

NON_POLITICAL China Coronavirus THREAD

Page 542 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Feb 4, 2009
29,822
10,365
136
I need someone to explain this. South Africa pauses AstraZenica vaccinations because it is less effective for moderate and light cases of Corona.
Edit: the South African mutated Corona
Why do this isn’t the goal to prevent hospitalization and death?
Do they have an adequate Plan B vaccine available?



Just seems better to be vaccinated than not be vaccinated even if that vaccine prevents death and hospitalization only.
 
Last edited:

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
9,311
1,871
136
I need someone to explain this. South Africa pauses AstraZenica vaccinations because it is less effective for moderate and light cases of Corona.
Edit: the South African mutated Corona
Why do this isn’t the goal to prevent hospitalization and death?
Do they have an adequate Plan B vaccine available?
Yeah J&J
 

herm0016

Diamond Member
Feb 26, 2005
7,635
518
126
Why didn't they set up smaller plants PER country? Or per country WILLING to do so: this should be TERRIBLY EXPENSIVE to set up, so not all could afford it.

The country would provide the building and the equipment per the vaccine maker specs and the company would produce the vaccines locally. Because the number of vaccines required to be produced in such factories would be quite small by comparison to their current factories, they could produce them much faster and, in case of big countries like USA, they could always make multiple factories instead of just one. And they could also do this for EVERY COVID vaccine maker.

By increasing the number of plants manufacturing the vaccine, it could reach the require number for "normalcy" a heck of a lot sooner, no? A total of between 4.9B and 5.6B vaccines are needed for herd immunity (70% to 80% vaccinated) and that's just for 1st dose, so double that for 2nd dose.

By keeping the number of plants manufacturing the vaccine low they are in essence bottlenecking the vaccine deployment thus for all intents and purposes, prolonging this crisis.
You are not in the manufacturing industry are you....
 

Zorba

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 1999
9,119
3,107
136
I need someone to explain this. South Africa pauses AstraZenica vaccinations because it is less effective for moderate and light cases of Corona.
Edit: the South African mutated Corona
Why do this isn’t the goal to prevent hospitalization and death?
Do they have an adequate Plan B vaccine available?



Just seems to be it is better to be vaccinated than not be vaccinated even if that vaccine prevents death and hospitalization only.
Only things I can think of: Afraid the ineffective vaccine could put evolutionary pressure on the virus, or afraid the ineffective vaccine could hurt uptake of a future more effective shot?
 

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,911
1,358
126
AstraZeneca is less effective against the S. Africa variant.




.
SA is suspending AZ vaccine for now. Not looking good.

South Africa suspends AstraZeneca vaccine drive (msn.com)

.
 

H T C

Senior member
Nov 7, 2018
332
189
86
Amongst the many many problems with this, especially for RNA vaccines, no company wants some 3rd party it doesn't really know fucking up and hurting people or their rep. Adenovirus based vaccines can be made in more places but there are still limits to the materials, infrastructure, and expertise available. It is far easier to make a shitload of vaccine at a few plants very efficiently and ship it out everywhere instead of reinventing the wheel.
Ordinarily, something like this wouldn't even be considered but, given the gravity of the situation, it's imperative to vaccinate as many people as possible AS FAST AS POSSIBLE so the world returns top normalcy THAT MUCH SOONER.

Like i said, it would be the vaccine MAKER that would operate the plant to produce the vaccines: it would be the country's job to provide the building and equipment, per the vaccine maker's specs.


You are not in the manufacturing industry are you....
Actually, i am: i work @ a ball bearing manufacturing plant.
 
Last edited:

pmv

Diamond Member
May 30, 2008
8,166
3,166
136
AstraZeneca is less effective against the S. Africa variant.




.

Yeah. Dispiriting news. Hasta La Zeneca, baby.

 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
36,540
10,468
136
Ordinarily, something like this wouldn't even be considered but, given the gravity of the situation, it's imperative to vaccinate as many people as possible AS FAST AS POSSIBLE so the world returns top normalcy THAT MUCH SOONER.

Like i said, it would be the vaccine MAKER that would operate the plant to produce the vaccines: it would be the country's job to provide the building and equipment, per the vaccine maker's specs.
I think this would actually slow things down considerably. The RNA vaccine makers especially went from the lab bench to commercial scale production in three quarters so there are a finite number of people with the knowledge and expertise to engineer, build, and operate the lines. Adding production to existing facilities is going to a faster, safer, and more efficient road to more doses which is what's happening.
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
36,540
10,468
136
Seeing all the partying in FL where people are basically licking each other I propose we militarize and seal the border till this is over.
 

pmv

Diamond Member
May 30, 2008
8,166
3,166
136
I'm still confused what these new variants mean for the vaccine programs. It sounds as if all of them are substantially reduced in effectiveness against the SA variant (though not against the Kent variant, from what I've seen reported). And presumably more strains will arise once the vaccination programs get going?

And when they say they still protect against severe disease and death, is that also applicable to the 'clinically vulnerable'? e.g. the very elderly?


Data that has recently been published, from trials of two vaccines that took place partly in South Africa after the emergence of the variant, show a marked decline in efficacy. Novavax had 89% efficacy in trials in the UK, but 60% in South Africa, where 92% of the cases were caused by the variant. The Janssen vaccine, made by a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, had 72% efficacy in the US but 57% in South Africa. Both vaccines, however, still protected against severe disease, hospitalisation and death.

The Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine offers as little as 10% protection against the Covid variant first seen in South Africa, researchers have suggested.
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
36,540
10,468
136
I'm still confused what these new variants mean for the vaccine programs. It sounds as if all of them are substantially reduced in effectiveness against the SA variant (though not against the Kent variant, from what I've seen reported). And presumably more strains will arise once the vaccination programs get going?

And when they say they still protect against severe disease and death, is that also applicable to the 'clinically vulnerable'? e.g. the very elderly?




It looks like certain mutations (South Africa and Brazil but not UK) have eroded the efficacy of vaccines but there's a couple important caveats with that. 1) the RNA vaccines are so spectacularly good at producing antibody response lab tests indicate they are still quite effective against the mutants 2) adenovirus vaccines appear to produce a slightly less robust response but as J&J demonstrated will still likely work albeit with some reduced efficacy. The most recent data on the Oxford/AZ vaccine against the SA strain does not appear conclusive due to small trial size.

Everybody involved is in the midst of updating their vaccines for the spike mutations. Which can, theoretically, be done very rapidly on the RNA platform. Adenovirus vaccines will be a little slower to adapt at scale since they have to culture the new line.
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
30,152
3,556
126
Epidemiologist I know posted these:



I got my Moderna #1 four days ago. I have seen in multiple places that efficacy for Moderna first shot after 14 days is 92%, however. I'm thinking that in 10 days I can feel decent confidence in semi-risk environments (masked and social distanced, of course).
 

H T C

Senior member
Nov 7, 2018
332
189
86
I think this would actually slow things down considerably. The RNA vaccine makers especially went from the lab bench to commercial scale production in three quarters so there are a finite number of people with the knowledge and expertise to engineer, build, and operate the lines. Adding production to existing facilities is going to a faster, safer, and more efficient road to more doses which is what's happening.
In what way? It would be the vaccine maker's OWN employees working in the plant, so no local workers needed to be trained for the job.

Like i said, the country would only provide the building and the equipment, per the vaccine maker's specs: everything else would be the vaccine maker's doing.
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
36,540
10,468
136
In what way? It would be the vaccine maker's OWN employees working in the plant, so no local workers needed to be trained for the job.

Like i said, the country would only provide the building and the equipment, per the vaccine maker's specs: everything else would be the vaccine maker's doing.
You are obsessing over location not production.
 
Dec 10, 2005
20,965
2,431
126
In what way? It would be the vaccine maker's OWN employees working in the plant, so no local workers needed to be trained for the job.

Like i said, the country would only provide the building and the equipment, per the vaccine maker's specs: everything else would be the vaccine maker's doing.
It's not a cookie cutter process, and there are only so many employees trained on the process. The tech transfer process would still have substantial hurdles, even outside of equipment needs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: H T C

uclaLabrat

Diamond Member
Aug 2, 2007
4,553
881
126
In what way? It would be the vaccine maker's OWN employees working in the plant, so no local workers needed to be trained for the job.

Like i said, the country would only provide the building and the equipment, per the vaccine maker's specs: everything else would be the vaccine maker's doing.
That scenario is still implausible. The manufacturer almost certainly doesn't have enough employees to spare running another facility. And if they were going to expand, they would still need to ramp the training/knowledge base on par with bringing new equipment online.

Really the bottleneck in expanding capacity is equipment lead times. It takes roughly a year (sometimes 2) to get manufacturing equipment t procured and operational, even once its identified. 6 months if its small and readily available (essentially off the shelf). Its not a fast process.
 

manly

Diamond Member
Jan 25, 2000
8,827
431
126
Seeing all the partying in FL where people are basically licking each other I propose we militarize and seal the border till this is over.
Are we sealing off just Floriduh or the entire deep South, and is your home state included? :p
 

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
8,560
3,348
136
Decent high level view of how Pfizer produces mRNA COVID vaccine and how they're working to scale.

I loved this article - seems pretty digestible for anyone who, at least, took some high school science. The analogies are great, I loved this one:
During the encapsulation process, the fragile strands of mRNA are enclosed in tiny balls of fat known as lipid nanoparticles. This makes them stable enough to travel from the syringe into the bloodstream and then into cells before they dissolve.
Without the balls of fat, the vaccine would disintegrate before it could deliver its payload. It's a bit like enclosing M&Ms in candy coating so they melt in your mouth, not in your hands.
 
  • Like
Reactions: purbeast0

purbeast0

No Lifer
Sep 13, 2001
50,808
3,511
126
Got first dose of Pfizer at 11:55am today. So far nothing as far as side effects. Usually with flu shots my arm starts to feel sore a few hours after so I'm expecting to have some soreness this evening.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spacehead and Kaido

ASK THE COMMUNITY