World News – CA – University of Washington, D.C. pharmacy professor comments on promising COVID-19 vaccine candidates

As the race towards a viable COVID-19 vaccine continues, two potential viable options have emerged before the package – from the pharmaceutical giant Pfizer and the US biotech company Moderna. With recent press releases from the two companies, touting 90% and 95% efficacy against the virus, respectively, University of Waterloo professor of pharmacy and Canadian pharmacology Kelly Grindrod urged the public to remain cautiously optimistic, stressing the importance of avoiding what is called « science by statement » Journalist ».

As a recent guest on Kitchener Today with Brian Bourke on 570 NEWS, Grindrod spoke to the promising candidates, potential ways to distribute the vaccine, and the incredible funding and interest being provided to develop a viable vaccine for COVID-19. With both vaccines describing promising results at this point in the testing, Grindrod said what pharmacists are really waiting for are more traditional scientific papers or reports about efficacy..

« What you’re seeing now are temporary announcements – these experiments aren’t actually finished yet (. . . I have planned pauses that will stop all the time, take a look at the data, make sure it works and that there are no serious side effects – and that’s what really happens here.

« What happened though . . . I mean we live in Waterloo right now . . . There were a lot of viruses at this speed in U. s. And elsewhere in the world . . . They became infected more than expected, so the experiments actually moved faster than people expected . . . Grindrod said.

While Pfizer and Moderna detailed their effectiveness in recent press releases, Grindrod said there is still more important information to reveal – such as how long the immunity the vaccines give will last, or whether it is more effective in younger patients. A tooth of the elderly. She adds that vaccine trials are soon to be completed, with a third candidate from Oxford also in development.

Both Pfizer and Moderna filters are engineered from mRNA, a process that has been researched for years but not yet commonly used. Grindrod said that most companies have not been so fortunate in developing vaccines in this way, although these potential candidates appear to be moving well.. One noticeable difference between these two candidates is Pfizer’s need for extremely low temperatures. Grindrod said that mRNA in Pfizer option is less stable than that in Moderna solution, requiring temperatures as low as minus 70 ° C. . The need for temperature means specialized and expensive refrigeration units, making them useless for remote rural communities and developing countries. The Moderna vaccine, developed as part of Operation Warp Speed ​​outside of the United States, has successfully stabilized this messenger RNA more effectively, meaning Pfizer may eventually be able to reach that level as well.. . Grindrod said vaccines tend to improve gradually as we see more options available.

“The interesting thing is that you see massive government funding going into this – and I think pretty much in the world that we realize we’re going to take what we can get . . . « . « You may have two competitors, but we may need as many companies as possible that produce their vaccines because we have to vaccinate the world – and the vaccine itself will not work everywhere. ».

« For companies, it’s often a bit of a race. But for all of us, that’s really cool.

Assuming trials continue without a problem and move to limited distribution in early 2021, Grindrod said there are still many questions about who gets vaccinated first. One idea, she said, is that the focus should be on front-line service providers – doctors, nurses, pharmacists, personal support workers, and hospital guard staff, followed by primary workers and individuals in pooled care settings..

« Once we get into those high priority areas, it will likely take months to get past these . . . Then we’ll get to the people at home. Grindrod said. « We’ll see it move in waves – it won’t be first come, first served. You are likely to be very targeted.

Speaking of vaccine frequency and vaccine safety concerns, Grindrod said that COVID-19 vaccines are seeing a great deal of interest, as they are being monitored step-by-step by the many large organizations involved in their development.. To the anti-vaccination crowd, Grindrod admits that some people are fundamentally opposed to vaccination, and that likely won’t change.. She said launching a COVID-19 vaccine first to frontline providers could serve to demonstrate its safety to members of the public who hesitate but are open to the possibility of being vaccinated.. .

« There is an unconfirmed middle group. They are worried, not knowing . . . They read some things on the Internet. Mostly they’re not based on facts, they’re based on fear – I think they’re the ones who need persuasion.

Grindrod said she hopes the epidemic has taught some members of the public how fortunate we are to get vaccinated, and that ideas and beliefs about vaccines can turn in their favor more. She said the speed of developing a COVID-19 vaccine was « amazing », with a level of investment never seen before.

“This has been a problem we’ve been facing for years – we haven’t invested very well in vaccine research . . . Grindrod said. « That’s part of speed – the other part of speed, again, is that the virus is bad. Waterloo is witnessing it now – there are a lot more people getting sick than we expected: These experiences are moving much faster too..

She adds that going forward, disinformation and fear will likely be one of the big challenges to widespread adoption of the vaccine – and that we will need to ensure that frontline personnel are well-educated and are able to communicate about the safety and safety of available vaccines.

Vaccine, Moderna, University of Waterloo, Vaccination, Pfizer