How the Oxford-AstraZeneca covid-19 vaccine was made
BMJ 2021; 372 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n86 (Published 12 January 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;372:n86Read our latest coverage of the coronavirus outbreak
All rapid responses
Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not including references and author details. We will no longer post responses that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
Dear Editor,
Would it be possible to publish more information about the differences in immune responses seen in low dose/standard dose regimens and standard dose/standard dose regimens, and their implications for vaccination programs.
Competing interests: No competing interests
Dear Editor,
Dr Chaand Nagpaul, BMA Council chair, was on national news today (23.01.21) saying that the gap between first and second doses of Pfizer Covid vaccine should be halved from 12 weeks to 6 weeks.
I suspect he has not read the BMJ interview article (BMJ 23rd January) with Andrew Pollard, leader of clinical trials of AstraZeneca Covid vaccine. Answering a question about dose interval, Professor Pollard says that a longer dose interval seems to provide a better immune response because the immune system has been given time to mature. He is referring to vaccines in general, not just the Oxford one.
Competing interests: No competing interests
Dear Editor
Dear Dr Pollard
Thank you for the clear and helpful answers to the many questions in your interview.
Your explanation about mutations arising from vaccine pressure is interesting. Is there any possibility that the vaccine trials in UK, Brazil and South Africa could have played a part in the emergence of the new variants specifically in these countries? Would you expect to see more mutations once the vaccines are rolled out in other countries and if so what surveillance systems need to be put in place?
Yours sincerely
Dr Rajalakshmi Lakshman
Consultant in Public Health Medicine
Competing interests: No competing interests
Is it ethical to include children in the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine trials?
Dear Editor
Speaking about the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine trials, Professor Pollard says "...we're moving on to new trials to evaluate different age groups - for example, children".[1]
What is the justification for including children in coronavirus vaccine trials?
Young people do not appear to be at serious risk with the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
To vaccinate people at an early age with what potentially could be annual coronavirus vaccination throughout life, with unknown long-term cumulative consequences, raises important ethical questions, particularly when they are not at serious risk of disease.
On what basis did the ethics committee evaluating the protocols for the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine trials conclude it was justifiable to include children and others not at serious risk of the SARS-CoV-2 virus?
Reference:
1. How the Oxford-AstraZeneca covid-19 vaccine was made. BMJ 2021;372:n86
Competing interests: No competing interests