What's new

COVID-19: UK government negotiating with AstraZeneca to secure South African variant vaccine

Mitz

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Jun 24, 2017
Messages
16,105
AstraZeneca's current vaccine is only 10.4% effective against mild to moderate infections caused by the South African variant.

An AstraZeneca variant vaccine is set to be bought by the UK government
The UK government has begun negotiations with AstraZeneca to secure a "variant vaccine" that can tackle the South African variant, Health Secretary Matt Hancock has said.

Also known as the Beta variant and the B.1.351 variant, a study published in March found two doses of the current AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine only had a 10.4% efficacy against mild to moderate infections caused by the variant.

The strain shares similar mutations to other variants, which has caused concern that those inoculated with the AstraZeneca vaccine could be exposed to multiple variants.

In a speech delivered at the University of Oxford, where the vaccine was developed, Mr Hancock said: "There is yet more to do, the work isn't over yet - we're still procuring all the time, and planning what we need to keep this country safe, including new vaccines specifically targeted at variants of concern.

"I can tell you today that we've started commercial negotiations with AstraZeneca to secure a variant vaccine - future supplies of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine that have been adapted to tackle the B.1.351 variant first identified in South Africa.

"Once again, we're leading the way and backing projects with potential, so we can keep our vaccination programme one step ahead of the virus and protect the progress that we've all made."

AstraZeneca said any future version of its vaccine would need to be approved for use by medicines regulators.

"Any future version of the vaccine would need to be approved for use by the medicines regulator."

The South Africa variant prompted surge testing and enhanced contact tracing across the UK after clusters not linked to travel were first detected in Britain in January.

Up to 19 May, 904 cases of the variant have been identified in the UK - a rise of 41 from the previous week, latest Public Health England data shows.

Pfizer, one of the other vaccines available in the UK, previously said there is no evidence its jab needs updating against current known variants.

Two doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine were found to be 60% effective against the Indian variant, also called the Delta variant.

The company has not confirmed if it is working on tweaking its vaccine for that variant.

Analysis: The variant vaccine will be welcome - but is just catching up with the virus

By Thomas Moore, science correspondent

The mutating COVID virus has forced vaccine makers back to the lab bench - and governments to consider a tweaked booster to keep up protection.

Moderna is already testing a reformulated vaccine against the concerning variant first identified in South Africa.

Pfizer and AstraZeneca are also updating their shots - and now the health secretary has revealed the UK government is negotiating with the latter for doses.

So far, a little under 1,000 cases of the South African variant have been confirmed in the UK and it continues to spread slowly despite surge testing.

Like the variant originally detected in Manaus, Brazil - or Gamma, as it is now known - it has a mutation called E484K that helps it to evade the immune system.

While scientists believe existing vaccines would still prevent most serious infections and deaths, any drop in protection would be a step backwards in our hard-won exit from the pandemic.

But while a reformulated jab gives some security, it is just catching up with the virus.

Some scientists argue that it is better to mix together genetic material from lots of variants, or even to predict where evolution might take the virus and design a vaccine against such a super-strain.

The pharma companies are going to have to be smart to outwit the shape-shifting COVID virus.


https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...secure-south-african-variant-vaccine-12323385
 
Shove it, I'm having the second jab and no more, I'm not being jabbed with all this shite, every five minutes.
 
"The study, which was based people of an average age of 31, shows that protection may be as low as 10%. The research wasn’t able to determine whether it protects against serious illness or hospitalisation, because this group of people were at low risk of serious illness. Other research suggests that the vaccine is still likely to reduce severe cases and deaths from the B.1.351 strain. More research is needed in this area."

nice one sky we are all gonna die better cancel my sky subscription then

https://www.bhf.org.uk/informations...ews/coronavirus-and-your-health/covid-variant
 
I'm in no way a covid denier or anti-vaxxer, but anyone can see that you don't have to be either to come to the informed conclusion that there is more to this than meets the eye. If the pharmaceutical behemoths were asked before this situation for a wish list of steps that would create a scenario that would allow for their exponential growth, this would have to be that scenario.
A total absolution of any legal repercussions arising from any complications linked to the development and administration of the drug, a drug that now seems will need to be re-invented then re-administered constantly with associated costs to be passed onto the end-user and to then put a cherry on the top, call in scientific advisors with vested interests to advise government ministers, who also have vested interests, and also possess seemingly bottomless pockets.
Whilst trying to imagine what kind of world we are leaving our children to inherit, I remember the late Baroness Thatcher addressing the nation with this sobering statement.

“The state has no source of money, other than the money people earn themselves. If the state wishes to spend more it can only do so by borrowing your savings, or by taxing you more. And it’s no good thinking that someone else will pay. That someone else is you.”

Not everyone's cup of tea I know, but this is as true today as it was back then, so being a taxpayer who most certainly doesn't have bottomless pockets and is also uncomfortable with bumbling idiots like Matt Hancock handing over blank cheques to AstraZeneca or Pfizer, I am totally with @andi52 on this one.
 
:hmm: 100 days, how you can possibly run proper clinical trials inside a 100 day vaccine / drug creation period? This is on the agenda at G7

target.JPG



https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-announces-100-day-target-to-create-new-vaccines
 
:hmm: 100 days, how you can possibly run proper clinical trials inside a 100 day vaccine / drug creation period? This is on the agenda at G7

View attachment 248607


https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-announces-100-day-target-to-create-new-vaccines
Its seems all caution has well and truly been cast to the wind, I suppose having too long of a trial could throw up too many complications, either that or the pharma companies have a lot of the ingrediants reaching their sell-by date!
 
It's meaningless; a soundbite, nothing more. Political soundbites don't dictate drug development and big pharma makes big money. They're not going to piss away their reputations and credibity on half baked drugs just because politicians think it sounds good. IMHO. No different to every new POTUS who takes office and bumbles on about what they're gonna do in their first 100 days. Who gives a fuck about their first 100 days; they're elected for 4 years.
 
Last edited:
No different to every new POTUS who takes office and bumbles on about what they're gonna do in their first 100 days. Who gives a fuck about their first 100 days; they're elected for 4 years.

Umm, it's not about Bidens first 100 days. It's about Johnson's 100 day vaccine plan, he nicked the original 100 day idea from CEPI, whoever they are :hmm:

Epidemic diseases affect us all. They do not respect borders. CEPI is a innovative global partnership between public, private, philanthropic, and civil society organisations. We're working together to accelerate the development of vaccines against emerging infectious diseases and enable equitable access to these vaccines for people during outbreaks.

https://cepi.net/

https://cepi.net/about/whoweare/#the-cepi-team
 
It's meaningless; a soundbite, nothing more. Political soundbites don't dictate drug development and big pharma makes big money. They're not going to piss away their reputations and credibity on half baked drugs just because politicians think it sounds good. IMHO. No different to every new POTUS who takes office and bumbles on about what they're gonna do in their first 100 days. Who gives a fuck about their first 100 days; they're elected for 4 years.
Here's to hoping common sense will prevail.
 
Umm, it's not about Bidens first 100 days. It's about Johnson's 100 day vaccine plan, he nicked the original 100 day idea from CEPI, whoever they are :hmm:

Epidemic diseases affect us all. They do not respect borders. CEPI is a innovative global partnership between public, private, philanthropic, and civil society organisations. We're working together to accelerate the development of vaccines against emerging infectious diseases and enable equitable access to these vaccines for people during outbreaks.

https://cepi.net/

https://cepi.net/about/whoweare/#the-cepi-team

Doesn't matter where it came from, my point is the 100 day target is absolutely nothing new and in this respect - along with most of the others - it's meaningless. Just gives the media something to help fill the 24 hr news cycle. The big pharmaceutical companies are not state owned. Boris and his G7 pals can say whatever they like. Sounds nice to some, not so nice to others, but it ain't worth a damn when all is said and done.

Here's to hoping common sense will prevail.

As I just posted above; big pharma isn't state owned. Hancock isn't chairman of board. BJ&Co don't dictate drug development time frames which is incredibly unpredictable. They can certainly help fund it but big pharma will pay an enormous financial and reputational price if they were to let political considerations dictate their agendas.

IMHO.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom