Advanced studies of AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 candidate vaccine are temporarily discontinued while the company examines whether a report of a patient with a serious-looking effect is similar to the injection.
In a statement released Tuesday night, the company said its “standard review procedure had caused a pause in vaccination to allow review of protection data. “
AstraZeneca did not disclose any facts about imaginable appearance effects unless she calls it “a potentially unexplained disease. “The STAT news site first reported the pause in testing, stating that the imaginable-looking effect had occurred in the UK.
A spokesperson for AstraZeneca showed that the vaccination break covers studies in the United States and other countries. Late last month, AstraZeneca began recruiting another 30,000 people in the United States for its largest vaccine study. It also tests the vaccine, developed through the University of Oxford. , in thousands of others in Britain, and in smaller studios in Brazil and South Africa.
Two other vaccines are recently undergoing full-scale end-stage testing in the United States, one made by Moderna Inc. and the other by Pfizer and Germany’s BioNTech. These two vaccine paints from AstraZeneca, and the studies have already recruited about two-thirds of the volunteers in need.
Temporary suspensions of primary medical studies are not unusual, and research into any serious or unforeseen reaction is a mandatory component of protective testing. AstraZeneca is under pressure that the challenge is possibly a coincidence; diseases of all kinds can also occur in studies of thousands of people.
“We are working to speed up the review of the bachelor occasion to minimize any possible effects on the test schedule,” the company said.
The progression came on the same day that AstraZeneca and 8 other drug brands issued a pledge, committing themselves to meeting the highest moral and clinical criteria in their vaccine progression.
The announcement follows fears that President Donald Trump will put pressure on the U. S. Food and Drug Administration to pass a vaccine before it becomes effective.
The United States has invested billions of dollars in efforts to expand several vaccines that oppose COVID-19, but public fears that a vaccine is uncertain or useless can simply be disastrous and derail efforts to vaccinate millions of Americans.
FDA officials did not respond to requests for comment Tuesday night.
Fearing that some of the world’s despots will rush for vaccines, they have been properly examined.
It was meant to be a loose vaccine. But then. . . . .
Instead of administering your COVID-19 vaccine, Oxford enters a meeting with a drug manufacturer
“A few weeks later, Oxford, suggested through the Bill
https://www. inquirer. com/business/drugs/oxford-fauci-cdc-vaccines-astrazeneca-merck-pfizer-moderna-coronavirus-pandemic-who-harvard-20200828. html
This is normal procedure in drug trials.
yes, I agree that this is general and necessary, but I also believe that if there is no vaccine before the election, the other people involved in those trials would be more than satisfied.
This security break will have to be forgotten in the “oh, my God, crazy Trump forced him to rush into politics and it’s dangerous, don’t take it!”When the vaccine is created before the election.
If after the election, this same pause will be used to show that all precautions have been taken and that this is a valid judgment, I miss that.
We ask, we pay, this is my pension and my long-term health
yes, I agree that this is general and necessary, but I also believe that if there is no vaccine before the election, the other people involved in those trials would be more than satisfied.
You’ve got the total upside down. Of course, there are vaccines before the election: some are being tested lately.
What is not, and has never been, in the 10-month window between the onset of COVID in January and the US election on November 3 is a chance that a vaccine, which would have been naked, will be developed, tested and fully approved. mandatory minimum to lie convincingly about “success” before the election. Development and testing take much longer than that, more than several years than several months, and other people who really know it have made that clear.
The United States did not even seem to be aware that it had a serious COVID challenge until March, so there is little need for a vaccine, let alone the concept that the onset of a vaccine can help increase the choice of the headline. This makes the actual window even smaller: more than six months than ten.
If I had hopes that the vaccine would be approved until Election Day in nine weeks, I would possibly abandon them now as well. No one wants to “slow down the procedure”; the procedure is not so fast at first. There are protocols, and there are vital reasons why they cannot be ignored or abbreviated. This is the reality, and in the context of this reality, the choice is irrelevant and irrelevant.
On the plus side, Trump can just invent something: that’s what he did with the pandemic anyway, so the mendacity about a vaccine deserves to be an herbal resolution for him. You can even claim a conspiracy in your own right, because you do too. All the time.