In article , PeterC
writes
On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 15:54:21 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 15/01/2021 08:04, Rod Speed wrote:
jon wrote
I have a preference for the Oxford jab.

Why when it clearly produces a worse result ?

Some article say immunity result were different because of alternative
criteria of success.

The numbers are 90, 94.5 and 95% for Oxford, Moderna and Pfizer
respectively. Not much in it and in all cases likely to minimise
symptoms even if not 100% effective.


https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-...oderna-and-pfi
zer-coronavirus-jab-candidates-compare-12134062

According to people from Oxford etc. the AZ one has been in development for
about 10 years, so not rushed out this year. I suppose that trials hadn't
statrted befor Covid because there was no need for them.
Also, there hasn't been a case (yet!) of anyone in the trials of AZ actually
getting Covid that has been symptomatic. It would be my preference,
especially with 12 wees to wait for the second dose and Pfizer not
recommending that gap.
At one stage it was stated that with the AZ vaccine it was the 2nd dose
which was the more effective. They had discovered this by accident due
to a mistake during the trials. The initial testing was 1st large dose,
2nd small dose but it only gave 64% immunity. When they reversed it the
effectiveness rose to over 90%.

I just hope they are not risking cocking the whole thing up chasing the
numbers game for fleeting headlines.
--
bert