Thai Cabinet sets aside Bt6 billion to buy 26 million Covid-19 vaccines from AstraZeneca

[DirtyHarry55]

6 minutes ago, Virt said:

 

Is it not just Pfizer which vaccine needs to be stored at - 70 celcius? 

 

That could cause some logistic issue, which makes sense for Thailand to buy from Astra, if that vaccine can be stored at more normal temperatures. 

Didn't look into that yet. 

 

As for the normal flu shot not working. There are a few simple reasons why that is the case. The yearly flu shot does not cover all types, plus not everyone develops anti bodies even if vaccinated. 

In general the flu shot prevents a lot of flu cases during the elderly population in the risk group every year, and if we didn't have a flu vaccine, you would see  more deaths every year, far greater than covid 19, so don't dizz vaccines. 

 

As for stocks. Well yeah there is a chance to win or lose on that roulette and I jumped on that wagon too. 

 

Personally I bought stocks in Pfizer, Moderna and Astra zeneca, but I hope that all vaccines is a success no matter if it's other companies, than those I invested in. 

 

We need to get this world up and running again, and vaccines could be a major step. 

 

If you don't want a shot, it's fine.

It's up to people if they want it or not. Heck even my old mom refuse to get it even if she is in the risk group and also have close friends that refuse.

 

Personally I'm getting a shot when it's released for my age group and in the meantime i have the chance to monitor if fever is the worst side effect, which is acceptable. 

 

If Thailand bought 30 million doses that wouldn't cover the entire risk group if 2 shots needed , but if it could protect 15 million Thais that want the vaccine it's a good start. 

 

Hopefully it will lead to open borders again.

 

I miss travelling..... 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question is will Thailand with so few cases be eligible get the Vaccine any time soon as form what I understand the Vaccine will be distributed to those with the most need first.
 

[Jack Mountain]

11 minutes ago, DirtyHarry55 said:

 

Question is will Thailand with so few cases be eligible get the Vaccine any time soon as form what I understand the Vaccine will be distributed to those with the most need first.
 

Always handy, guinea pigs ... ????

 

[Virt]

6 minutes ago, DirtyHarry55 said:

 

Question is will Thailand with so few cases be eligible get the Vaccine any time soon as form what I understand the Vaccine will be distributed to those with the most need first.
 

 

True and it also raises the question when is the best time to start the program. 

No need to vaccinate a lot of people in a country with very few cases, unless they plan to open up. 

That would just waste a lot of immunity time, and we're not sure how long it last. 

 

Would make more sense imo to plan ahead and start the program a month before opening the borders, so that people had a chance for their vaccine to work.

I assume it takes 2-3 weeks for people to develop enough anti bodies like regular flu vaccine? 

 

But I'm just a couch expert so what do I know ????

[DirtyHarry55]

16 minutes ago, Virt said:

 

True and it also raises the question when is the best time to start the program. 

No need to vaccinate a lot of people in a country with very few cases, unless they plan to open up. 

That would just waste a lot of immunity time, and we're not sure how long it last. 

 

Would make more sense imo to plan ahead and start the program a month before opening the borders, so that people had a chance for their vaccine to work.

I assume it takes 2-3 weeks for people to develop enough anti bodies like regular flu vaccine? 

 

But I'm just a couch expert so what do I know ????

I'm not expert either but logically thinking I don't expect Thailand will get the Vaccine any time soon.

[Grumpy one]

What are they going to do, split each shot into 3.

That seems to be the way dogs get a rabies shot

[GroveHillWanderer]

Incidentally, and for what it's worth, the results have now been published for the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine, showing it has up to 90% efficacy, when given according to the optimal dosing regimen.

 

Oxford vaccine up to 90% effective

[John Drake]

3 hours ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

There's no such thing as an rDNA vaccine. Some of the vaccines under development (from Pfizer and Moderna, for example) use a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine construct. However it's a scientifically-established principle that RNA cannot make (or modify DNA) so even those vaccines using mRNA technology cannot affect your DNA.

 

Also, the vaccine being discussed here, from Oxford University/AstraZeneca is not an mRNA vaccine - it uses what's known as a viral vector vaccine technology.

 

Only 70 percent average, according to this CNN story released 48 minutes ago. If true, the AZ vaccine is a massively inferior product compared to the American vaccines. https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/23/europe/astrazeneca-oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-intl/index.html

Edited November 23, 2020 by John Drake

[anchadian]

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-55040635

 

The coronavirus vaccine developed by the University of Oxford stops 70% of people developing Covid symptoms, a large-scale trial shows.

 

It will be seen as a triumph, but also comes off the back of Pfizer and Moderna showing 95% protection.

However, the Oxford jab is far cheaper, and is easier to store and get to every corner of the world than the other two.

 

[moogradod]

21 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

..... the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine, showing it has up to 90% efficacy, when given according to the optimal dosing regimen.

 

Oxford vaccine up to 90% effective

"up to 90% efficacy" sounds like "up to 90% discount" in your local carpet shop to me. The article you refer to is as well speaking of an average efficacy of 70%. The two mRNA vaccines need only one shot and this one is over 90% effective.

 

However one advantage might be the tolerability for the elderly. Anyway it will be the Astra Zeneca brand for Thailand since the others are American made and obviously China does not allow Thailand to acquire the stuff from there (someone said on TV).

[473geo]

8 minutes ago, John Drake said:

 

Only 70 percent average, according to this CNN story released 48 minutes ago. If true, the AZ is a massively inferior product compared to the American vaccines. https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/23/europe/astrazeneca-oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-intl/index.html

Of course the over selling and under selling would not come into the equation at all  ????

Edited November 23, 2020 by 473geo

[moogradod]

6 minutes ago, anchadian said:

It will be seen as a triumph, but also comes off the back of Pfizer and Moderna showing 95% protection.

However, the Oxford jab is far cheaper, and is easier to store and get to every corner of the world than the other two.

I doubt you would like to trade off savings of 20$ versus 25% less protection. If I could choose I would go for Pfizer or Moderna, but I might not even get the Oxford vaccine here in Thailand or at least not very quickly.

[GroveHillWanderer]

58 minutes ago, John Drake said:

 

Only 70 percent average, according to this CNN story released 48 minutes ago. If true, the AZ vaccine is a massively inferior product compared to the American vaccines. https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/23/europe/astrazeneca-oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-intl/index.html

If you read the report, it's only 70% if you decide to give half the people what you already know is a less effective dosage. Why would you ever do that?

Edited November 23, 2020 by GroveHillWanderer

[GroveHillWanderer]

45 minutes ago, moogradod said:

The two mRNA vaccines need only one shot and this one is over 90% effective.

No, they both need two doses as well. In addition, each dose is roughly 10 times more expensive than the Oxford vaccine.

 

Quote

Pfizer / BioNTech’s and Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccines have a lot in common: they’ve both been highly effective in clinical trials, they’re both gene-based vaccines, and they also each require two doses. 

Pfizer, Moderna vaccines two doses

 

Then there's also the fact that they both need ultra-cold storage (-80 & -20°C, respectively) whereas the Oxford vaccine can be kept at 2 to 8°C.

[GroveHillWanderer]

1 hour ago, anchadian said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-55040635

 

The coronavirus vaccine developed by the University of Oxford stops 70% of people developing Covid symptoms, a large-scale trial shows.

 

It will be seen as a triumph, but also comes off the back of Pfizer and Moderna showing 95% protection.

However, the Oxford jab is far cheaper, and is easier to store and get to every corner of the world than the other two.

 

That's a terrible piece of writing and actually quite misleading.

 

The article actually makes it clear that they tried two different dosing regimens during the trial: two equal doses of a higher amount or one lower dose followed by a higher dose.

 

With the two "high" doses they achieved only 62% efficacy. With the "low then high" dosing the efficacy was 90%. In fact that's one of the things they try to determine in trials - what they optimal dosage is.

 

The 70% figure comes from the average of the two groups.

 

However, now that they know what the optimal dosing method is, that's obviously the one to go with.

Edited November 23, 2020 by GroveHillWanderer

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

On 11/18/2020 at 3:27 PM, riclag said:

It doesn't give a percentage of its effectiveness ????

 

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3638538-all-eyes-on-astrazeneca-oxford-shot-after-strong-pfizer-moderna-results

 

Quote

Oxford-AstraZeneca's vaccine also showed a strong immune response in older adults in Phase-2 clinical. Findings from the final stage of AZN's vaccine studies are due to be released shortly.

 

Quote

AstraZeneca has earlier said it won’t profit during the pandemic and that the vaccine will cost between $4 and $5 a dose compared to the Pfizer/BioNTech shot priced at $19.50 a dose, or $39 for a two-shot immunization.

 

Quote

The Phase 3 clinical trials of Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine should be over by January/February 2021, said Dr VK Paul chairman of the National Expert Group on Vaccine Administration for COVID-19.

 

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-22/astra-oxford-shot-is-key-to-escaping-pandemic-for-many-nations

 

Quote

 

Trial successes from Pfizer Inc. and Moderna Inc. have buoyed hopes that a Covid-19 vaccine is coming soon. But much of the world, outside of rich nations like the U.S., is counting on another company’s shot to escape the crisis.

 

Findings from the final stage of AstraZeneca Plc’s vaccine studies are due to be released shortly, and the stakes for lower- and middle-income nations are immense. The shot developed with the University of Oxford accounts for more than 40% of the supplies going to those countries, based on deals tracked by London-based research firm Airfinity Ltd.

 

The Astra vaccine costs a fraction of the price set by Pfizer and will be manufactured in multiple countries, from India to Brazil. It should be easier to deploy far and wide than other shots that need to be stored at ultra-cold temperatures.

 

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Looks like there's news out today on the efficacy of the AZ vaccine, which at 70-90% effective looks to be less than those from Pfizer and Moderna, which both tested around 95%.

 

Quote

Astra-Oxford Vaccine Prevents Average of 70% of Covid Cases

November 23, 2020

A Covid-19 vaccine developed by the University of Oxford and AstraZeneca Plc prevented a majority of people from getting the disease in a large trial, another promising development in the quest to end the pandemic.

 

The vaccine stopped an average of 70% of participants from falling ill, an early analysis of the data show. That’s below the high bar set by Pfizer Inc. and Moderna Inc., but effectiveness rose to 90% for one of two dosing regimes, using half a dose followed by a full one later.

 

“We see a lot of merit in this regimen and we will now start discussions with regulators into incorporating this dose combination for further clinical investigation,” an Astra spokesman said.

 

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-23/astra-oxford-vaccine-prevents-average-of-70-of-covid-cases

Edited November 23, 2020 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

49 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

The article actually makes it clear that they tried two different dosing regimens during the trial: two equal doses of a higher amount or one lower dose followed by a higher dose.

 

With the two "high" doses they achieved only 62% efficacy. With the "low then high" dosing the efficacy was 90%. In fact that's one of the things they try to determine in trials - what they optimal dosage is.

 

The 70% figure comes from the average of the two groups.

 

However, now that they know what the optimal dosing method is, that's obviously the one to go with.

 

Thanks for giving the above clarification of the AZ vaccine testing results...

 

Yes, they CAN get to the 90% efficacy level, apparently, with the half-dose first followed by full dose second dosing regiment. So that's good news.

 

But, even if the final AZ Phase 3 testing does confirm that and doesn't show any adverse effects, that level of efficacy still is going to be somewhat below the promised 95% or so levels of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines -- if you happen to live in a country with the significant infrastructure required to keep them continuously frozen as required.

 

As the various articles lately have mentioned, it seems that most of the developing world is likely going to relying on the AZ vaccine (assuming it's proven to work). Both because it's cheaper to administer, and also because it's easier and cheaper/less complicated to distribute and deliver.

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Some more news on the AZ report:

 

Quote

AstraZeneca COVID-19 results don't impress Wall Street, while Pfizer, BioNTech, Moderna gain

• On just the headline numbers alone, the AstraZeneca (NASDAQ:AZN)/Oxford Covid-19 vaccine trial numbers (on average preventing 70% of infections) didn't match the 90%+ results from the Pfizer/BioNTech (PFE, BNTX) and Moderna (NASDAQ:MRNA) studies.
• SVB Leerink's Geoff Porges throws a bit more shade on things, calling AZN's efficacy results "embellished," and raising questions about safety data disclosures. Porges believes the vaccine will never be licensed for U.S. use.
• For now, AstraZeneca awaits data from its U.S. trial (this morning's results were from trials in the U.K. and Brazil). In the meantime, the company is readying applications for conditional approval from other global regulators, including an emergency use listing from the WHO.

 

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3638661-least-one-sell-sider-not-impressed-astrazeneca-covidminus-19-results-azn-slips-while-pfizer

 

Edited November 23, 2020 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[mark131v]

A very good report that clarifies this 70% 90% stuff!

 

Basically 2 full doses is less effective than 1 x 1/2 dose followed a month later with a full dose that gives the circa 90% number, all the 70% number means is the combined of the 2 dosing regimes

 

It's a no brainer that the 90% dose will be the one used whilst managing to use less stock, big win, win! and with the benefit of price and less expensive storage and logistics I reckon it will be a big winner

 

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-oxford-vaccine-is-up-to-90-effective-in-preventing-coronavirus-tests-show-12134940

 

"We have a vaccine for the world," Professor Andrew Pollard, chief investigator of the Oxford Vaccine Trial at Oxford, said.

 

For one course of dosing - where people were given a half dose of AZD1222, followed by a full measure at least a month after - there was an efficacy rate of 90%.

 

Professor Pollard went on: "We think that by giving smaller first dose we are setting up the immune response better to respond. We will dig in more to that. We have started work this morning."

 

He added: "It's critical to understand what everyone is measuring. What counts as COVID disease varies between different protocols.

 

"If you are only counting hospitalisations then we would have bigger efficacy. We count mild disease and that is much harder to protect against."

 

According to Professor Sarah Gilbert from Oxford, there was a reduction in transmission following administration of the inoculation. She said: "We are seeing reduction in asymptomatic infections.

 

"It looks like the vaccine is protecting against severe disease and mild disease - that it is going to make a big difference to transmission. It is good news all round."

[mark131v]

A good in depth article comparing the 3 vaccines, interesting read and some analysis of the pro's and con's... 

 

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-vaccines-how-do-the-moderna-and-pfizer-coronavirus-jab-candidates-compare-12134062

[Jingthing]

On 11/18/2020 at 3:27 AM, Jack Mountain said:

$8 a shot, not cheap. How many are needed? Just one or do you need a booster ... at a price.

 

According to this probably 1.5 doses.

Half a dose first then later a full dose.

 

Coronavirus vaccine by AstraZeneca and Oxford up to 90 percent effective - The Washington Post

Quote

AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine up to 90% effective and easily transportable, company says

 

[Jingthing]

On 11/18/2020 at 10:14 AM, hotchilli said:

26 million doses.. and a population of?

I wonder who's going to dip-out....

The amount they are buying would be good for starters -- front line workers, very high risk people, etc.

[Jingthing]

On 11/18/2020 at 11:12 AM, Caldera said:

Will dirty foreigners be able to buy the vaccine here in Thailand at a not-too-much inflated price?

 

What I'm concerned about is that I might need to get vaccinated at some point, as being vaccinated might well become a requirement for entering other countries when somewhat "normal" international travel resumes.

I reckon so but likely at a super premium price.

[Jingthing]

On 11/18/2020 at 6:41 AM, Don Chance said:

What about the China needle? Chinese have 5 vaccines in phase 3 testing. Soon there will be plenty of vaccines for everyone!

Take a hard pass on those.

[Jingthing]

On 11/21/2020 at 3:09 AM, Soikhaonoiken said:

Didn’t they report recently that a Thai Company was on the verge of producing a vaccine and it was in its final stage of testing..... If so why are they buying a vaccine from the UK Company,.... Or were they telling fairy-tales again... 

Hopefully scrapped.

[Jingthing]

On 11/21/2020 at 3:28 PM, Virt said:

 

Is it not just Pfizer which vaccine needs to be stored at - 70 celcius? 

 

That could cause some logistic issue, which makes sense for Thailand to buy from Astra, if that vaccine can be stored at more normal temperatures. 

Didn't look into that yet. 

 

As for the normal flu shot not working. There are a few simple reasons why that is the case. The yearly flu shot does not cover all types, plus not everyone develops anti bodies even if vaccinated. 

In general the flu shot prevents a lot of flu cases during the elderly population in the risk group every year, and if we didn't have a flu vaccine, you would see  more deaths every year, far greater than covid 19, so don't dizz vaccines. 

 

As for stocks. Well yeah there is a chance to win or lose on that roulette and I jumped on that wagon too. 

 

Personally I bought stocks in Pfizer, Moderna and Astra zeneca, but I hope that all vaccines is a success no matter if it's other companies, than those I invested in. 

 

We need to get this world up and running again, and vaccines could be a major step. 

 

If you don't want a shot, it's fine.

It's up to people if they want it or not. Heck even my old mom refuse to get it even if she is in the risk group and also have close friends that refuse.

 

Personally I'm getting a shot when it's released for my age group and in the meantime i have the chance to monitor if fever is the worst side effect, which is acceptable. 

 

If Thailand bought 30 million doses that wouldn't cover the entire risk group if 2 shots needed , but if it could protect 15 million Thais that want the vaccine it's a good start. 

 

Hopefully it will lead to open borders again.

 

I miss travelling..... 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't agree with your logic.

Of course vaccines shouldn't be mandatory. 

But the point of these vaccines is to create herd immunity without actual infection that benefits entire societies.

So for that to happen in Thailand, based on my current reading, about 70 percent of the population would need to get vaccinated. 

Sure of course high risk people first. But that doesn't address herd immunity via vaccine.

Once there is more confidence about the safety and effectiveness of probably this vaccine in the O.P., then there should be very strong public relations effort to vaccinate as many people as possible.

Then Thailand (and the world if they do the same) can really eventually fully move on from this.

[Jingthing]

On 11/21/2020 at 3:39 PM, DirtyHarry55 said:

 

Question is will Thailand with so few cases be eligible get the Vaccine any time soon as form what I understand the Vaccine will be distributed to those with the most need first.
 

It's a reasonable question but this really is a global effort. In the case of Thailand they will need to be heavily vaccinated to ever hope to open up their vital tourism industry again. 

[GroveHillWanderer]

6 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Of course vaccines shouldn't be mandatory. 

But the point of these vaccines is to create herd immunity without actual infection that benefits entire societies.

You only need herd immunity if you're in a situation where a disease is already causing serious problems in a country or there's a clear, imminent risk of it doing so. As it stands right now, that's not the case in Thailand. 

 

If they maintain the current entry restrictions until the vaccines are available and then require vaccination certificates for entry, then they shouldn't really need herd immunity.

 

I've made this point before but it could be like the policy for Yellow Fever, which is a serious problem in countries where it exists but does not require the Thai population to be vaccinated because no-one is allowed in from those countries without a vacation certificate.

 

It wouldn't hurt of course to have herd immunity here if possible once the vaccine is available and the cost and logistics make it attainable, assuming that SARS-CoV-2 continues to be a problem around the world.

Edited November 24, 2020 by GroveHillWanderer

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

You only need herd immunity if you're in a situation where a disease is already causing serious problems in a country or there's a clear, imminent risk of it doing so. As it stands right now, that's not the case in Thailand. 

 

If they maintain the current entry restrictions until the vaccines are available and then require vaccination certificates for entry, then they shouldn't really need herd immunity.

 

I've made this point before but it could be like the policy for Yellow Fever, which is a serious problem in countries where it exists but does not require the Thai population to be vaccinated because no-one is allowed in from those countries without a vacation certificate.

 

It wouldn't hurt of course to have herd immunity here if possible once the vaccine is available and the cost and logistics make it attainable, assuming that SARS-CoV-2 continues to be a problem around the world.

Yellow fever isn't currently a global pandemic.

 

Also I really don't think you've thought this through. 

 

Thailand before the pandemic was one of the top mass tourism destinations in the world.

 

So under your theory of opening up and allowing people in with vaccine certificates, what does that really mean?

 

Even if the vaccines they got are really 90.percent effective what does that mean?

 

Its not only 10 percent of those people that could still be infected. It's also a large percentage of that 90 percent that could be infected but are avoiding severe symptoms. 

 

So you see allowing in millions and millions of such people upon a virgin mostly not vaccinated Thai population would definitely result in outbreaks here and even potentially severe ones if people have stopped mitigation practices. 

Edited November 24, 2020 by Jingthing

[GroveHillWanderer]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

Yellow fever isn't currently a global pandemic.

 

Also I really don't think you've thought this through. 

 

Thailand before the pandemic was one of the top mass tourism destinations in the world.

 

So under your theory of opening up and allowing people in with vaccine certificates, what does that really mean?

 

Even if the vaccines they got are really 90.percent effective what does that mean?

 

Its not only 10 percent of those people that could still be infected. It's also a large percentage of that 90 percent that could be infected but are avoiding severe symptoms. 

You're right that CoVid-19 is a pandemic right now, but if the vaccines are as effective as it's hoped they are, it may not be a pandemic (or at least not of the same massive proportions) within a year or so. Some health professionals (the more optimistic ones, admittedly) think that it will eventually disappear completely, like SARS-CoV-1 did. Personally, I have my doubts about that, but then I always tend towards a more pessimistic view of things.

 

I'm not sure why you think that a large number of the people who have been vaccinated would still be capable of being infected, and infecting others. For the Oxford vaccine at least, the team has pointed out that their vaccine would seem to prevent those vaccinated from passing on an infection even if they get it.

 

Also, it's not clear what you're referring to with the 90% figure. That is the percentage of those who got infected, who were in the placebo group. It doesn't refer to a percentage of either the entire number of participants, nor to a percentage of those vaccinated.

 

The independent DSMB analysis of the results, showed that only 10% of those who were infected were in the vaccinated  group. There's no data I've seen that suggests any of the other vaccinated people were infected (but even if they were, see my earlier point).

 

However, once again I see nothing wrong with trying for herd immunity here, just that it may ultimately not be necessary if they can keep the virus from ever getting a foothold here and the rest of the world gets CoVid-19 under control (or even, as per those more optimistic health professionals, completely eradicate it).

Edited November 24, 2020 by GroveHillWanderer