I am just hoping this is misreporting, otherwise this takes “we have had enough of experts” to a whole new level. Britain Opts for Mix-and-Match Vaccinations, Confounding Expertshttps://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/01/health/coronavirus-vaccines-britain.html?smid=tw-share …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @ArisKatzourakis
It seems to be only about edge cases, not about a strategy of mix and match. (Someone shows up, they may not be likely to return, the first type is unknown. The guidance is about whether to withhold booster, and notes lack of interchangeability.) I read the full guidelines.pic.twitter.com/AZDt34metl
1 reply 3 retweets 25 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
Interesting, suggests partial misreporting. Though this alone would not make it ok. Especially as such cases would be very difficult to monitor.
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @ArisKatzourakis
For harm? Or lack of efficacy? (I agree they should collect data. We should always have more data. It’s just that this seems like an edde case they put the guidelines down for, not a policy as implied by the article).
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @zeynep
Both! The mixing of AZ with Sputnik is, rightly, the subject of a new trial.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @ArisKatzourakis
This may not have enough data because it is presented as an alternative to not offering any booster at all so may not have a sample size with power. Do you think it should be trialed anyway? Seems like something to avoid except as desperate measure? (Agree they should track).
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
It seems doubly worrying in some ways if it will be deployed on edge cases that are unlikely to return. Hence there will be no data collected on this.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ArisKatzourakis
Yes they should track if they do it, even rarely. That said, they had a real trial planned on this. (Not because of supply—to see if it was better.) I’ll track down what happened. That’s what I was wondering, why is there an expectation it might be better?https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/08/covid-mixed-vaccine-trial-likely-to-begin-in-uk-next-month …
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
In early December, the UK task force said that it was going to trial various combinations to see if it induced heterologous prime-boost. (Again different than last-resort scenario in guidelines). I was just wondering if you think that’s a high priority for a trial?
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @andrew_croxford @zeynep
Aris Katzourakis Retweeted Prof. Akiko Iwasaki
Yeah it doesn’t seem an urgent priority. More long term,
@virusesimmunity has interesting ideas on this.https://twitter.com/VirusesImmunity/status/1345086699521646592 …Aris Katzourakis added,
Prof. Akiko IwasakiVerified account @VirusesImmunityThe good thing about the mRNA vaccine is that if you prime with it, you can boost with other types of vaccines (viral vectored, DNA, mRNA…etc). In the future, a mixed prime boost vaccine strategies can be tested to provide long term protective immunity. (9/n)Show this thread1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - Show replies
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.