(11-23-2020, 09:33 AM)BostonCard Wrote: One other thing about the vaccine trial is that the trial screened for asymptomatic infections, not just symptomatic infections as the Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech trials did, so the comparisons are a bit apples-to-oranges:
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-11-23-oxf...19-vaccine
Per that link, 70% efficacy for the Oxford/AZ vaccine is an average of it being 90% effective giving a half-dose first and 62% effective giving a full dose first.
Somewhere there's an AstraZenaca marketing exec pulling out his hair that the headlines say 70% effective rather than 90% effective if administered in a certain way.
I was curious why a first half-dose would be more effective than a full dose, so I found this article:
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03326-w
The theories are:
1) small sample size. With a larger sample size the actual number might be as low as 66%.
2) a half first dose does a better job stimulating production of the "memory" T-cells. It's possible that more time between a full first dose and second dose would do the same thing.
3) the Oxford/AZ vaccine is based on a modified chimpanzee virus. A full dose might be prompting the immune system to fight the chimp virus as well.

