Public announcement on vaccine 9 Nov 2020

[whole diary]

[johnneyw]

Okay, I'll be first to blink.
Does today's announcement have an impact on earlier discussions about the impact of Covid 19 on the future of our railways or have the consequences of the outbreak already shaped it's future?

[bobm]

It is certainly an interesting development. 

If it is approved there are still significant logistical challenges.  People will need two injections three weeks apart and the vaccine will need to be transported deeply refrigerated to remain effective.

[TaplowGreen]

Okay, I'll be first to blink.
Does today's announcement have an impact on earlier discussions about the impact of Covid 19 on the future of our railways or have the consequences of the outbreak already shaped it's future?

Bit of both.

It will encourage people to see light at the end of the tunnel perhaps sooner than they thought, however the genie is out of the bottle in terms of remote working and in terms of mass commuting, the future has been shaped and things will never be the same again.

[CyclingSid]

The problem could be

deeply refrigerated

not all healthcare facilities have the required level of refrigeration. This is colder than normal vaccine requirements, apparently.

Addition

He said that logistical problems with the vaccine would need to be tackled, as it has been reported that it requires storage at −70?C. ?That is not necessarily routinely available in most health centres even in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom), let alone globally.?

Source: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4347

[Electric train]

The problem could be

deeply refrigerated

not all healthcare facilities have the required level of refrigeration. This is colder than normal vaccine requirements, apparently.

[/quote]

One option being banded about this morning on the news is to use large venues like sports halls, this would certainly process a lot of people quickly and the storage would be in large refrigerated trucks, baring in mind you need 2 doses

Like the PM I'm cautiously optimistic, but the real question how effective is it, how often do you need have it repeated etc

[grahame]

Okay, I'll be first to blink.

Does today's announcement have an impact on earlier discussions about the impact of Covid 19 on the future of our railways or have the consequences of the outbreak already shaped it's future?

Thank you for that starter.   Yes - for sure such progress may have an effect.  It might (or might not) prove to be the answer we've been waiting for, or a false dawn, or bring its own problems.   It may be overtaken by other more practical solutions for billions of people ... whichever, IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion) we should be looking / thinking / planning / organising on an probability that something will let us move on from where we are this winter.

[GBM]

Certainly need for the services to assist with such a mass inoculation(s).
Also good to note that perhaps the Government is actually planning this for a change.

Slightly concerned that the long term effects will not have started to come to the fore as yet, and probably not for a few years unfortunately.

Greatly welcomed even if it's only 90% effective, as that would still leave a 1-in-10 as still being susceptible.

[johnneyw]

Greatly welcomed even if it's only 90% effective, as that would still leave a 1-in-10 as still being susceptible.

My good lady's eldest daughter is a pharmacist who every year vaccinates people against infuenza. According to her, the flu jabs are generally considerably less than 90% effective.  I recall her mention a figure as low as 30% but also saying that even this rate was helpful.

[Marlburian]

Surveys of public opinion suggest that between 25 and 45% of people would decline to take the vaccine, certainly in its early days. (Other surveys may be are available.) Some are "anti-vaccers", others would prefer to see what side effects there may be and which age cohort might be most affected.

Which suggests that 2021 will be a year of transition, as some people who have been jabbed will think they're immune - but for how long - whereas others may remain liable to restrictions in how they live.

As I understand it, people even older than I will be the first to be offered the jab, so I'll have a chance to see how they react before deciding whether to have it. (And if I decline, will I be able to opt for it later in the year?)

At the moment I feel reasonably safe without it.

[IndustryInsider]

In terms of the railways, if this means that social distancing measures can be greatly reduced or even eliminated, then that will help immensely.  I can see leisure travel returning to pre-pandemic levels reasonably quickly (within a couple of years) and then continuing to grow medium term at the rate before the pandemic.

There will be less business travel (how much as a percentage I'm not sure), and much less traditional commuting for a 9-5 job.  I have a feeling that will mean a large amount of trains on the networks into the big cities, especially into London, will be surplus to requirements and the cutters torch will become very busy.  For example, on the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) network, there may be no need for 12-car 387s into Paddington, and no need to run 9-car Elizabeth Line trains (keep them all at 7-car).  Other GWR areas may well keep their usual train lengths, but frequency of service and keeping a service at all, at least shorter term, might be the main area of concern.

If a large percentage of commuters still go into the office two or three days a week there might be a problem with capacity if everyone chooses (which they logically would) to go in Tue/Wed/Thu, as you would then have a large percentage of your stock only needed for three days a week rather than five.

GWR are in a better position than many operators as TfL^» (Transport for London - about) took over much of their suburban flows into Paddington, and other areas - especially into Bristol - were struggling with what they had.  Operators in a very awkward position include SouthEastern, Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern, and (especially) SWR^» (South Western Railway - about) with their fleet size vastly swollen by commuting demands.  SWR currently taking delivery of a lot of new trains of fixed 10-car length.

The key decisions will all rest on how patient the Government and Treasury remain with paying to run the railway.  A key ally the rail industry has (which the airline industry, suffering much more, hasn't) is the environmental argument in their favour, which, pre-pandemic, was building momentum quickly.

It will be very interesting to see how it pans out, and it would be a fool who thinks they can predict exactly what will happen.

[stuving]

I assume Pfizer's announcement was made now because of the strict stock-market rules about the release of such price-shifting news. Given how many people would know, for example at the FDA, it was bound to leak - especially given the leadership report to what's-his-name (you know, the big blond bloke with the hyperactive Twitter finger).

But was it premature? No, just preliminary, according to the trial protocol. Pfizer agreed with the FDA to do interim assessments when the number of positive Covid-19 cases reached 62, 92, and 120, with the minimum for completion being 160. That agreement took so long that by then they already had 94, as reported. Counting cases is the only way to assess the statistical power of the trial, since there is no way of observing the number of infections (some of which the vaccine suppresses).

Two definitions of "case" are used: one with (CDC-approved) symptoms plus a standard PCR (aka NAAT or genome) test, the other serological (i.e. antibodies). However, I can't see (on a quick read) anything specific about when that serological test is done, nor how it fits with the tests done for vaccine-induced antibodies. So it may be that the trial doesn't detect asymptomatic case, which would be a bit serious. In any case, more such cases may happen at any time.

It is reported that Pfizer are working on relaxing some of the requirements for cold storage, but it's hard to see how they can. Anything that could impact effectiveness would invalidate the trial and any approval based on it; and while a repeat trial just for that one factor could probably be smaller, it would still take time. As would any assessment of the longevity of immunity, of course.

The original figure for the maximum storage temperature was -70^oC. That was translated into -94^oF for domestic American purposes, and has drifted below that in retranslation to ^oC. That's within the range of dry ice, already quite widely used for such things, but only just. I think that in most cases putting a (gloved) handful of pellets in a tub with some vials will keep them below -20^oC (which most freezers are not guaranteed to do), but for -70^oC, you need a well-engineered insulated box. Pfizer say they have developed a suitcase-sized one that can hold a few thousand doses and stay cold for 10 days - though perhaps  only if you don't open it. In effect, the problem is now one of how to manage supplies of dry ice and choreograph the logistics.

I'm a bit surprised that the cold storage requirement is seen as such a difficulty. The vaccine will keep under normal refrigeration for 24 hours, so all you need is to get the right number of subjects to turn up to get one on the day. That doesn't sound such a difficult administrative task, even if its size is rather daunting.

[TaplowGreen]

There will be less business travel (how much as a percentage I'm not sure), and much less traditional commuting for a 9-5 job.  I have a feeling that will mean a large amount of trains on the networks into the big cities, especially into London, will be surplus to requirements and the cutters torch will become very busy.  For example, on the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) network, there may be no need for 12-car 387s into Paddington, and no need to run 9-car Elizabeth Line trains (keep them all at 7-car).  Other GWR areas may well keep their usual train lengths, but frequency of service and keeping a service at all, at least shorter term, might be the main area of concern.

If a large percentage of commuters still go into the office two or three days a week there might be a problem with capacity if everyone chooses (which they logically would) to go in Tue/Wed/Thu, as you would then have a large percentage of your stock only needed for three days a week rather than five.

II............. I can feel my enthusiastic backing for HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) waning given that you're suggesting its target market is contracting so dramatically! 

[Electric train]

In terms of the railways, if this means that social distancing measures can be greatly reduced or even eliminated, then that will help immensely.  I can see leisure travel returning to pre-pandemic levels reasonably quickly (within a couple of years) and then continuing to grow medium term at the rate before the pandemic.

There will be less business travel (how much as a percentage I'm not sure), and much less traditional commuting for a 9-5 job.  I have a feeling that will mean a large amount of trains on the networks into the big cities, especially into London, will be surplus to requirements and the cutters torch will become very busy.  For example, on the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) network, there may be no need for 12-car 387s into Paddington, and no need to run 9-car Elizabeth Line trains (keep them all at 7-car).  Other GWR areas may well keep their usual train lengths, but frequency of service and keeping a service at all, at least shorter term, might be the main area of concern.

If a large percentage of commuters still go into the office two or three days a week there might be a problem with capacity if everyone chooses (which they logically would) to go in Tue/Wed/Thu, as you would then have a large percentage of your stock only needed for three days a week rather than five.

GWR are in a better position than many operators as TfL^» (Transport for London - about) took over much of their suburban flows into Paddington, and other areas - especially into Bristol - were struggling with what they had.  Operators in a very awkward position include SouthEastern, Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern, and (especially) SWR^» (South Western Railway - about) with their fleet size vastly swollen by commuting demands.  SWR currently taking delivery of a lot of new trains of fixed 10-car length.

The key decisions will all rest on how patient the Government and Treasury remain with paying to run the railway.  A key ally the rail industry has (which the airline industry, suffering much more, hasn't) is the environmental argument in their favour, which, pre-pandemic, was building momentum quickly.

It will be very interesting to see how it pans out, and it would be a fool who thinks they can predict exactly what will happen.

When and it is when the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) relaxes the social distancing ect. and the Governments desire for carbon zero; road transport will have ever increasing tax on fossil fuel the empathies will be on rail and EV on the roads.

There is not much in the way of energy saving reducing 345 to 7 cars

[TonyK]

One option being banded about this morning on the news is to use large venues like sports halls, this would certainly process a lot of people quickly and the storage would be in large refrigerated trucks, baring in mind you need 2 doses

I had this year's flu jab at a local community centre, hired for the day. I think all of the medically trained staff at the surgery who could tell the safe end of a syringe from the naughty end were there, suited and booted. I was in and out in two minutes flat. Name, rank and number at the front door, directed to one of the many stations, jab, out the back door, home. I don't mind doing that twice more. I'm not going anywhere else.

Slightly concerned that the long term effects will not have started to come to the fore as yet, and probably not for a few years unfortunately.

Greatly welcomed even if it's only 90% effective, as that would still leave a 1-in-10 as still being susceptible.

Long-term effects seldom become apparent in the short-term. The most severe long-term effect of the illness has been demonstrated in almost 50,000 people in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom), though, and I'm willing to take my chance. 90% effective is actually extremely good for a coronavirus vaccine. This could change the way common flu is protected against, in due course.