Seconded.
A dumbed down version by any of the more knowledgeable regulars in here would be much appreciated.
The vaccines | vaxxed boosted unvaxxed? New poll
- Thread starter Badunk
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Seconded.
A dumbed down version by any of the more knowledgeable regulars in here would be much appreciated.
The short/simple version is that AZ argue that they are more obliged to fulfil their contractual commitments to the UK than they are to the EU, because of differences in the detail of those two contracts (a detail that has not yet been tested in court, which makes me assume the EU doesn’t have a leg to stand on).
Having subsequently met almost all of its commitments to the UK but a tiny fraction of what AZ promised to the EU this has pissed off the latter. Who have subsequently made vague threats about limiting the export of any vaccines out of the EU so long as this perceived injustice continues.
Thanks @Pogue Mahone, AZ does seem like it’s had issues with every part of the vaccine process bar the actual vaccine itself, which appears to work great.
Suppose it’s better that way round than the reverse.
Utterly.
Testing negative just means your viral load hasn't hit a certain level yet and not that you aren't infected and if you are you are of course very infectious on average.
There is already data that shows transmisson is reduced once vaccinated/post infection, that T-cells are being created and antibodies or T-cells are being detected many months after natural infection and that will be increasing constantly. Obviously we will be filling out the detail as vaccines roll out but if I were to guess where the figures will fall I'd say 75%+ reduction in transmissibility, 85%+ reductions in hospitalisation/ICU/Serious disease and that boosters either won't be needed or will only have to be every 3-5 years. Obviously I'm guessing the specifics of that and it will vary from vaccine to vaccine and again once we target the variants, but what data we have is largely encouraging. It will be interesting to see how my guesstimates compare to the real data this time next year.
I'm realising how much stats have leaked out of my brain.
From (long term) memory significance level is a test of the data where 95% = 5% chance that the null hypothesis is true, confidence level is the probability that if the test was repeated again and again the results would be the same and confidence intervals being a range within which a result would be expected to fall in 95% of the time and constructed from significance level (or perhaps confidence level or both/either - I forget the details). All closely related yet different. I suspect I've been conflating one or more at times.
That’s a big - and very important - factor that is completely unknown. We know for a fact that people are getting reinfected 6-12 months down the road (sometimes sooner) so it seems wildly optimistic to assume that a vaccine would give 4 to 5 years protection.
It will all become clear eventually but for the next year or two there’s no way we can be that confident about duration of protection.To assume that someone getting on a plane one year after being vaccinated is definitely immune you’re basically tossing a coin. In my opinion the real value of these passports is in the very early stages of reopening. The next six months or so. After that we’ll have to work on the assumption that the virus will be crossing borders on a regular basis regardless and we’ll have to mitigate that risk by making sure as much of the world as possible is vaccinated.
Kind of, but not quite.
The null hypothesis is either true, or it isn't - there's no probability assigned to it. A given vaccine either reduces cases of Covid, or it doesn't.
For the p-value, we assume that the null hypothesis is correct, and then the p-value denotes the probability of observing our observed data (or data more 'extreme') given the null hypothesis to be true. So we assume that our Covid vaccine does nothing, but then when we see the difference in case rates across the two placebo and the vaccine cohort, the p-value will give an indication of how likely this difference was to happen, under the assumption that there should be no difference.
I don't mean to be a nitpicky bore, but I just thought it might be interesting. And I've heard complaints from a lot of statisticians that p-values are so often misunderstood and misused, especially in medical statistics. To the point where research is being done in such a way that gives the best chance for a 'statistically significant' result, even if the corresponding research is no good (and I've experienced similar to this on a project I was helping on, where p-values were the be-all and end-all, despite us trying to say why they were pointless in our case).
Yeah, people often obsess about p-values too much, to the exclusion of other important factors.
One thing I’ve often wondered is p<0.05 important in fields other than medicine? For us it’s the holy grail. Obviously the smaller the p value the better but that 0.05 figure is the hard cut off between “yes it works” and “no it’s useless “ which always seemed a bit arbitrary to me!
AZ have re-announced their efficacy stats from the USA data. It's now being reported as:
The primary endpoint, vaccine efficacy at preventing symptomatic COVID-19 was 76% (confidence interval (CI): 68% to 82%) occurring 15 days or more after receiving two doses given four weeks apart. In addition, results were comparable across age groups, with vaccine efficacy of 85% (CI: 58% to 95%) in adults 65 years and older. A key secondary endpoint, preventing severe or critical disease and hospitalisation, demonstrated 100% efficacy. There were eight cases of severe COVID-19 observed in the primary analysis with all of those cases in the placebo group.
The vaccine was well tolerated, and no safety concerns related to the vaccine were identified.
https://www.astrazeneca.com/media-c...ry-analysis-confirms-safety-and-efficacy.html
Which makes you wonder why they bothered to do the 79% version a couple of days ago - that just made them look shady.
I'd like to think they were busy doing more detailed analysis on the numbers - like the Novavax decision to announce an overall figure for the UK trial, but then split out a "original covid" and a "UK mutation" stat as well. Maybe the full data/report from AZ will give us a clue.
The primary endpoint, vaccine efficacy at preventing symptomatic COVID-19 was 76% (confidence interval (CI): 68% to 82%) occurring 15 days or more after receiving two doses given four weeks apart. In addition, results were comparable across age groups, with vaccine efficacy of 85% (CI: 58% to 95%) in adults 65 years and older. A key secondary endpoint, preventing severe or critical disease and hospitalisation, demonstrated 100% efficacy. There were eight cases of severe COVID-19 observed in the primary analysis with all of those cases in the placebo group.
The vaccine was well tolerated, and no safety concerns related to the vaccine were identified.
https://www.astrazeneca.com/media-c...ry-analysis-confirms-safety-and-efficacy.html
Which makes you wonder why they bothered to do the 79% version a couple of days ago - that just made them look shady.
I'd like to think they were busy doing more detailed analysis on the numbers - like the Novavax decision to announce an overall figure for the UK trial, but then split out a "original covid" and a "UK mutation" stat as well. Maybe the full data/report from AZ will give us a clue.
I'm not too sure on other fields specifically, but I do know that medicine is always used as the example for 'p-hacking', so within the stats 'community' medicine is seen as the bold kid. Since my little experience in applying stats to real world is all based on medical applications, I have little view on other industries.
Indeed, the hard line of 0.05 is crazy, especially when you consider that if you originally get a p-value of say 0.057, if you just observed more data there's a good chance that p-value would then fall below 0.05. And suddenly your result becomes significant. Not that that's recommended of course! It just shows the non-rigidness (?) of them.
Confidence intervals of effect size should be included more often (or always). If I said that my vaccine reduces infections by 30%, and we know this to be significant because I got a p-value less than 0.05, then you'd be delighted with that. But if I said that my vaccine reduces infections by 30%, with a 95% CI of (2%, 58%), you'd be a lot more suspect. Even though they're from the same test.
There's 14 cases still to be adjudicated, so I wonder if they went with the interim numbers to avoid having those hanging over them? Clearly didn't go down well though. Whole thing seems utterly ridiculous really.
To be fair, we would tend to look at 95% CI as well. We’re not savages! Although it’s rare to dig much deeper than that in the stats section.
All of this could have been avoided with better communication between AZ and the DSMB. Such a trivial difference to get called out on in public.
The data coming out of Israel is fantastic. They’re even seeing a similar picture in a town that has 20% SA variant (see replies to tweet) If this keeps up they could essentially wipe the virus out in Israel (assuming no animal reservoir)
Of course, but what about doing away with p-values altogether and having CIs as the main result?
Well you don’t need a p value with a CI, right? I always assumed that if the 95% CI excluded no effect then that told you the p value was < 0.05. Using vaccines as the example. If the 95% CI straddled zero then you could be certain that any efficacy claim would not be statistically significant.
Woke up this morning feeling aches, sore throat and a bit lethargic but other than that no drama, 8/10 would get stuck again
Cases also dropping rapidly in (unvaxed) children as well, as they're not picking it up from adult contacts as often now. Israel's data is basically knocking down the worst-case scenarios for fun.
Yeah exactly, the 'result' from the p-value is included in the CI results, but with added context.
Denmark extending the pause in vaccination with AZ to middle of April.
Can they send them to me?
Fantastic news, my mum has already been vaccinated with Pfizer (HCW), today’s is my grandparents turn, will be a massive relief that.
Woke up this mornin',
I got them vaccine blues ...
I had mine yesterday and was a bit nervous considering I got it last May have been suffering with long covid (I'm now pretty much on first name terms with half the hospital). I was slightly worried what sort of symptoms I'd have but just felt a bit heavy eyed yesterday evening and had a very slight temperature but feel absolutely fine today. Relieved.
The nurses who dealt with my injection couldn't see why I was invited at my age, but I'm assuming I've been put in a category due to the last few months.
The nurses who dealt with my injection couldn't see why I was invited at my age, but I'm assuming I've been put in a category due to the last few months.
Curious to know if your long covid symptoms improve - have read a few things online indicating it happens for some people.
That hope had crossed my mind, it is just a hope but I'll be keeping a close eye on it. I'm getting there gradually anyway, and my symptoms are now lung related with my energy pretty much back to how it was before.
Another tick for the vaccines (Pfizer specifically).
In my province overall cases are just about hitting their peak, but cases in old people's homes have dropped from 568 two months ago to just 36 now, with only 2 symptomatic cases. There were no lockdowns or anything like that until a couple of weeks ago, it's entirely down to the vaccines.
In my province overall cases are just about hitting their peak, but cases in old people's homes have dropped from 568 two months ago to just 36 now, with only 2 symptomatic cases. There were no lockdowns or anything like that until a couple of weeks ago, it's entirely down to the vaccines.
Apparently Krispy Kreme are offering one free donut every day for the year for anyone who shows proof of vaccination. My choice to return to California for the shot seems smart now.
Survive Covid, get diabetes.
Survive Covid, get diabetes.
I recieved the Oxford vaccine today.
My mother got her appointment for the vaccine today, so happy. My father who’s the same age haven’t got his appointment yet though.
Ahaaaaa!
So you did go for the old smash and sniff option after all
Glad you're ok mate
That's encouraging
My wife got 1st Astra jab 2.5 weeks ago and she is telling me her arm is actually worse now than when she got the jab. Is this normal?
@Pogue Mahone
@Pogue Mahone
Last edited:
That's quite out of date now. The EU said yesterday they have exported 77m to date, it looks like they are(were) sending about 20m a week.
Do we know which countries the EU is exporting to?
33 different countries, although i don't know who has got what. The only news reports were of 21m to the UK.