[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

Yeah, you're right, the numbers don't look good but check out the confidence intervals (last column) All over the place! However, there's no technical reason to suspect that the vaccines won't work and/or are unsafe in over 65s.

The release for vaccines for use by either the MHRA in the UK or EMA in the EU are being done under different frameworks. The UK has given the vaccines we're having now an 'Emergency Use Authorisation' (EUA) This is not an approval of the vaccine in the traditional sense but more of a 'go ahead but you're on your own' status during the COVID emergency. One day, if COVID is gone, the authorisation will be withdrawn.

The EMA is working on a Conditional Marketing Authorisation (CMA) which is a step above an EUA in terms of the robustness of the data needed. CMAs can be converted to a full authorisation often quite easily. CMAs are time limited to 1 year.

I think it's due to the lack of data that the vaccine isn't being recommended for older recipients rather than any firm reason to doubt safety or efficacy.

Of course, the UK is currently generating a HUGE data set for over 65s right now which I am sure will be used to convert the various flavours of interim drug licencing into full licences

I do quite a bit of statistical work in my line of business.
The confidence interval in the AZ data is entirely negative and that's because there is no range of results that could fall within the entirely negative interval. The 1/314 result of the study is of insufficient statistical significance.

It seems to me as a layman in the epidemiology business that 1/314 is heading in the right direction.


---------- Post added at 16:28 ---------- Previous post was at 16:25 ----------

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Switzerland bans AstraZeneca vaccine for ALL citizens as Europe declares war on UK jab


https://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...cine-uk-latest


The decision makes it the only country in Europe not to authorise doses of the Oxford-produced jab for use. The Swiss medical regulator claimed there was a lack of data to reach conclusions on the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine. Approval of the jab had been widely expected by many in Switzerland.

I presume that their decision is based on a different approach to medical approvals.

The UK's approval is emergency and thus temporary. I'm guessing that Switzerland doesn't need to give emergency authorisation and would prefer, as a matter of principle, to give permanent approval subject to the study results they are awaiting.