It wont have been given an emergency license n that basis. The license was granted because of the claims of a 90% efficacy rate for the testing group as a whole - all ages.
AZ has been held to account by the Lancet among others for their lack of testing on older groups. That is just a fact.
Yes, and if that report said, say, 40%, I'd be worried and completely with you. Confidence intervals are exactly what they say on the tin and can be the lower end just as easy as the higher end.
But 8% is just completely, totally implausible. To the point where the confidence interval to state that number is about the same as a placebo.
For the same journo to say it's 70% under the age of 65...
... just screams "no chance". The vaccine won't just stop working completely after a certain age - it might diminish, that isn't unheard of at all due to age related immune system responses, but you're talking 10/15% - not a complete tanking of the efficacy to basically nothing.
Yeah if they had said 8% reduction in efficiency for over 65s I could understand it, this dramatic drop off combined with no-one being prepared to go on the record, has red flags all over it.
Well it looks like being a great night here in Covid fairyland, but some of us are helping with Zoom lessons for 7 year olds tomorrow. In Science they are answering the question, ‘why would the Germans attempt to undermine a British vaccine costing x20 times less than a German vaccine’......should be good......
Yes, and if that report said, say, 40%, I'd be worried and completely with you. Confidence intervals are exactly what they say on the tin and can be the lower end just as easy as the higher end.
But 8% is just completely, totally implausible. To the point where the confidence interval to state that number is about the same as a placebo.
For the same journo to say it's 70% under the age of 65...
... just screams "no chance". The vaccine won't just stop working completely after a certain age - it might diminish, that isn't unheard of at all due to age related immune system responses, but you're talking 10/15% - not a complete tanking of the efficacy to basically nothing.
Lol. All a big misunderstanding then. Very irresponsible to have gone public with this.I think there’s a mix up. 8% was the sample size of over 65s in the AZ study, rather than the efficacy.
I think there’s a mix up. 8% was the sample size of over 65s in the AZ study, rather than the efficacy.
The 8% article in the German press is a disgrace.
There are enough anti vaccine lunatics about and the one thing we don't need is to give them more talking points.
Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.