Search This Blog

Monday, August 16, 2021

Why do We Need to Be Concern about Some Vaccine Effectiveness Studies (Part 1) ?

Rewritten on 1 September 2021

Some Vaccine Effectiveness Studies can give misleading results especially those having shorter timeframes and those using real World Data. This article will use real World data to illustrate why.

Reasons to Carry out Studies

It is not uncommon for countries to carry out vaccine effectiveness studies. They might have carried out the studies under their peers' or political pressure. They might want to find out why there are more people infected. Traditional and other accurate studies could cost a lot of money.


What's Vaccine Effectiveness and Efficacy?


Both are measuring how well the vaccine will work. The main difference is in the way of measurement. Vaccine Efficacy uses clinical trial data, whereas Vaccine Effectiveness uses real-World data. The other differences are as shown in this table.

 

Vaccine Efficacy

Vaccine Effectiveness

Range

Selective group according to age, sex, ethnic & known medical condition

Real-World data is where is

Sample size

At least 30,000 selected participants are divided into 2 groups;  the vaccine and Placebo group

The community at large.  No grouping.  Large sample size.

Controls

The participants are not told about their vaccination status. Whether they were vaccinated using a vaccine or just plain salient water. Participants are asked to go back to the community and work as per normal routine.

Members in the community are well aware if they were vaccinated. The unvaccinated and those having only 1 dose will usually take extra effort & precautions to protect themselves. The government often introduce infection control measures

Testings

The participants are tested at regular intervals. 

Testings are done on an ad-hoc basis

Exposures

The total and actual numbers of vaccinated and unvaccinated exposed to Covid is known

The total and actual numbers of vaccinated and unvaccinated cannot be accurately determined.

95% Confident Interval (CI) of Outcome

Usually narrow, not more than 10% except when the sample size is too small

Usually wide, can exceed 50% and sometimes can go negative.

.

Outcome

Less biased because participants do not usually know what “vaccine” they have taken

Member unvaccinated or partly vaccinated will exercise extra precautions to control their activities.



Are there no other means to accurately determine Vaccine Effectiveness?


Yes. There are many other ways and means. Some of the common ones are listed as follows:


These study methods are similar to those Clinical Vaccine Trial tests used to determine Vaccine Efficacy. In fact, these other methods are variants. They claimed to be fairer and more accurate than the effectiveness measurement. Many of these studies are using selective candidates and not using real World data.

But they would not carry out these studies if the existing vaccine is still effective. This is mainly because it is not quite ethical to "bluff" those participants who have taken salient water instead of the vaccines. It is also expensive.

One other way is to do scheduled household visits. Every member of the household will be tested for infection at regular intervals. This will reduce the errors caused by not knowing how many had been exposed to the risk of infection. However, the result could still be biased because those unvaccinated are aware that they have not been vaccinated. They will take extra preventive precautions.


What are the most common problems in Measuring Vaccine Effectiveness?


We often use real World data & the standard efficacy formula for effectiveness calculation. The accuracy of the results can be a problem.


The results can contain lots of unknowns & variables. What we are measuring is not the vaccine effectiveness. It could be the effectiveness of the vaccine plus the other control measures. The results could also be biased.


The standard formula compares the probability of the vaccinated against unvaccinated people. The formula does not work when the majority of the population has been vaccinated. An example is when the unvaccinated people approaching 0%.


Examples?


Singapore’s Ministry of Health (MOH) recently changed its reporting method. They used to tell the public about where and who were infected. Now, they concentrated on telling people about what will happen to vaccinated and unvaccinated.
The purpose is to encourage people to take vaccines. The MOH website presented 2 interesting charts. One showing the hospitalization of those infected (Figure 6). The other is showing the number of infections (Figure 10). The former is showing in a 28-day interval starting from 29 June 2021. the latter in a 14-day interval starting from 20 July 2021.





The charts give the following information

a) How many of the infected people are vaccinated and unvaccinated?;
b) How many of them are infected and how many are hospitalized?
c) How many are seriously ill requiring oxygen support, ICU bed and how many have died?;

Using the real World data collected from MOH, an attempt was made earlier using the standard formula of attack rates to work out the Vaccine Effectiveness but the results were quite a blizzard and confusing. These are as shown in the following examples.


Chart 1: % of Population vaccinated with 1 dose and full 2 doses



Chart 2: The Virus Attack Rates by Vaccination Status

Chart 3: Vaccine Effectiveness Calculation

Explanations?


Chart 1: This chart shows the vaccination status of Singapore residents over the period specified. The working example in this article will use the vaccination status as the base to work out the attack rates. It will assume entire Singapore is one community Chart 2: This chart shows the attack rates of vaccinated and the unvaccinated. The data is extracted from Figure 6: Local Cases in the Last 28 Days by Vaccination Status & Severity of Condition. The attack rate is explained in this wiki. Chart 3: This chart works out the vaccine effectiveness using the vaccination status as shown in Chart 1. The effectiveness is worked out based on the same formula in this wiki

Result Interpretation?


1. The raw attack rate & the Effectiveness calculations appear to suggest that those unvaccinated has rate and effectiveness better than those vaccinated; this is not logical; 2. The effectiveness also went negative for those having 1-dose and also for those full-dose people recently; this is not possible.



Why Such Outcomes?


The following could be the reasons: 1. The real World data are biased. The unvaccinated know that they are vulnerable. They have either hibernate or took extra precautions themselves from being caught by Covid. On the other hand, many vaccinated people will usually not follow the protocols & SOPs.

2. The attack rate of the full vaccinated has gone negative because the spreading of the disease had gone unnoticed for some time. By the time it was discovered, many people, especially the elderly, had already been infected. The attacks on vaccinated people went record high.

3. Almost all the elderly and those people in customer service have been vaccinated in Singapore. The elderly are most vulnerable to infection and the customer service people are constantly exposed to infections. Their chances of being infected are much higher than unvaccinated.

4. The Government's various control measures have distorted the attack rates.

In Conclusion

If we use real World Data and the standard formula to work out the effectiveness, we are not actually measuring the vaccine effectiveness but a combination of vaccine effectiveness as well as other measures to prevent Covid-19 infection. These measures are shutdowns & isolations, mask wearings, etc. Part 2 of this article will suggest a method where we can monitor the effectiveness of this combination effect.


Tuesday, August 10, 2021

3rd Booster Shot in Israel Not Effective?

10 August 2021

The media is again spreading news about Israel's vaccine programme. This time, it is about the 3rd booster shot using Pfizer. Again, Israel Times is the first to report. There was not much news in other medias as before. The news were kind but the forumers were not. Many, especially those from the Twitters have blasted out without even checking what was reported.


The Times of Israel

This report originated again from the Times of Israel. It has the following qualifications:

a) Limited data not enough to draw conclusions on booster’s effectiveness;


b) Fourteen Israelis have been diagnosed with COVID-19;


c) Not clear whether the 14 infected before or after having the booster;


d) 11 of the 14 cases were over the age of 60;


e) two that were hospitalized were over 60; lastly,


f) Some 420,000 Israelis have been administered a third booster shot so far, in a drive that began last week.


In other words, it is advising readers not to rush into making a conclusion.


Are the results so far any good?

Without adding more, the result of the 3rd booster shot was better than expected for the following reasons:


a) The over-all effectiveness of 0.003% (14/420000) was 72 times better than the 0.24% obtained during the trial test of the 3 common vaccines in the US;

 

b) 11 of the 14 infected were of elderly who were over 60s;

Why Booster Shots people still can get infected?

One must know that vaccine does not offer 100% protection against Covid-19 infection. Vaccine helps human body to produce anti-bodies to fight Covid. The anti-body amount will depend on the physical conditions of the human. Elderly will produce less. Those with underlying diseases such as diabetes will produce even less antibodies.


The Israel's result is giving yet another encouraging news about the use of booster shots to tame Covid-19. This time, it worked among elderly people.


Any other countries have examples?

Bahrain and UAE switched to Pfizer as 3rd booster after having majority of their citizens taken SinoPharm. The switch for Bahrain was around 2 June 2021.

https://www.voanews.com/covid-19-pandemic/bahrain-offers-pfizer-biontech-boosters-those-previously-vaccinated-chinese-shot

There was a similar report from Reuter.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/uae-bahrain-make-pfizerbiontech-shot-available-those-who-got-sinopharm-vaccine-2021-06-03/

The real World Chart of Bahrain is telling us that Pfizer as 3rd booster shot worked very well to tame the infection as well as the death rate. It was claimed that Bahrain offered Pfizer as 3rd shot because there were worries growing over China's SinoPharm shots.











 






 




Wednesday, August 4, 2021

Is it True that Inactivated Vaccines are Safer with less Side Effects?

Many has the opinion that inactivated vaccines are safer. They claimed that unlike the other vaccines, Sinovac has lesser serious adverse side effects.  Let find out in this paper.

 
What is Inactivated Vaccine?

It is just another type of vaccine, mostly using dead viruses cultivated from some organs such as Monkey’s kidney cell or otherwise, just like how they cultivated Poliovaccine before

The production of inactivated poliovaccine on serially cultivated kidney cells from captive-bred monkeys 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6244995/

 

Any Proof about the Side Effects?

There are tons of report about side effects on many other types of vaccine especially mRNA vaccines but never much news about those inactivated vaccine for some unknown reasons.  There were much talks about vaccine manufacturers always have non-disclosure agreement signed with the countries before agreeing to supply the vaccines.   So,  not hearing much about the side effects does not mean the  vaccines are safer.  

Let’s examine the Sinovac’s reports submitted to WHO for approval in April 2021.  This is the copy. https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/immunization/sage/2021/april/4_sage29apr2021_sinovac.pdf?sfvrsn=2d82605d_5

Inside the report, there are several report lodged by various testing institutions.  One the reports from Brazil has this chart (click picture to enlarge)

The report said there were 77.1% of those vaccinated suffering from adverse reaction.  This figure is higher than the 66.37% in the unvaccinated group.  The type of adverse effect is tabulate here for comparison:

If we were to discount those common symptoms (colored blue) which is about 57% for both vaccinated and unvaccinated,  the more serious side effect will be 42.78% for vaccinated and 43% for the unvaccinated as shown in the table.

Other independent report published in Lancet also showing similar results in the Phase 2 trial test.  They showed Sinovac were having higher % in the common adverse effect but the % is lower than the report showed by the Brazilians.

  https://www.thelancet.com/article/S1473-3099(20)30843-4/fulltext 


Interesting Chart About Sinovac

The above chart shows that those vaccinated has a pyramid covering up the Grade 3.  On the other hand,  those unvaccinated has similar pyramid but covering up also grade 4 to grade 6.  This grade 4 to grade 6 is for those suffering moderate or severe hospitalization and ICU.  The chart showed that there were about 83.70% of those vaccinated and unvaccinated group had mild grade1 to grade3 symptom.  About  33% (83.7%-50.65%) of them requiring medical attention.

Second WHO submission


The first submission to WHO was also in April.  This was the submission report.

https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/immunization/sage/2021/april/5_sage29apr2021_critical-evidence_sinovac.pdf




iPhone and iPad: How to Create a Short Cut in Home Screen to Clear Cache & History

23 November 2024 What are Cache and History? Cache and browser history store information about websites you've visited.  The C ache s to...