The topic is new, so I will try to make the article more analytical (for making specific decisions), rather than popular science. It is based on numerous answers to questions from friends and acquaintances.
Here are some popular science articles that can serve as an educational program and a more detailed presentation:
Spoiler
What for ?
In parallel, many vaccines with different principles of action are being developed, and a reasonable question arises - which one is better in a particular case? And what are the dangers / risks.
Considering that the efficiency figures for everyone are high, but at the same time, no one gives up development. Although for businesses (including pharmaceuticals), early stopping is a common strategy, given that each next stage of clinical trials is much more expensive than the previous one.
What parameters of vaccines are important?
Probably everyone has heard about immunogenicity , this is the ability of a vaccine to cause the development of specific immunity, i.e. directed against a specific agent. Some parameters of immunogenicity (for example, antibody titer ) are easily characterized by one number, so it is very tempting to use it as a universal metric of "goodness" of a vaccine, such as the number of megapixels in a camera.
Other parameters ( cellular immunity, tissue immunity ) are difficult to measure in laboratory conditions + there are no generally accepted scalar measures of their values, therefore these issues are raised less often.
The magnitude of immunogenicity does not indicate how effectively the vaccine will protect against the disease, specificity comes into play.... This value does not have a beautiful scalar expression, but the meaning is intuitively clear - after "tuning" with a vaccine with a high specificity, the pathogen will attack the immune system, and nothing more, which it would not attack before vaccination.
Specifically in the case of COVID, this parameter is very important, since basically people die not from being hit by the virus itself, but from the friendly-fire of its own immunity , an autoimmune reaction. And the vaccine, hypothetically, can aggravate the situation, with a combination of certain adverse factors. But this is very actively denied . This article is not intended to be a battle against (or for) conspiracy theories, so let's move on.
, , , , . , , . , - "", COVID, . PCR , , , , , ? , , ( ) .
efficacy ( - ) effectiveness ( , ) , .
- , .
? ()
. , , / , . "", .. , ( )
:
, ( ), ( ).
:
:
, "" . .
:
, . ( ) , - . , ( ) , .
:
, - FP-3 FP-4 , , . , "". (< 70 C) .
: , rocket science .
. , , . , .
:
, , ( ). , , .
:
, , ( ) , "". .
:
, - . - .
:
:
, . , . , (~ -2-10 C) .
: Sinovac (CN), Valneva (FR), (RU)
( ) . - , ( ), .
:
( ) , . COVID , , "", . , , , - .
:
, , ( ). .. data science dataset ( ).
:
. , ~> .
:
, .
:
: Novavax (US), (RU)
, ( COVID ). - . , :
- ,
- , .
, .
:
, , , - . , , , . , - , , - . , , , - , .
:
, , , , ( ). , , - - .
:
. , ~> .
:
, . , ( ), , "", - . - , . ( , , , , - - ).
, COVID , , - . - . - , mRNA Vaccines Are Not Going To Affect Your DNA, , , . , , , , - .
:
, . (-70 C, ) (-2-5 , ) .
: Pfizer/NTech (GE+US), AstraZeneca (UK), Moderna (US)
?
. , , , , - . - , , - , . , . . , ( , , ), , . . , .
, 40 , , , ( COVID) . , , . , . , .
|
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
|
|
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
|
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
|
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
|
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
?
( , ) - : V, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Moderna . (, ), .
- ( ) + ( ) + ( ).
Pfizer/NTech , , ( ) .
V , - . , - , . .
win-win , Pfizer, -70. AstraZeneca +2-8 70% ( 95% Pfizer). , , 90% .
, , , ( ). , , . .
. , , . , .
, . / . , , / - , .
P.S. , , , , / . Novartis , .
PSS The article deliberately omits most of the mechanisms and technical details, both with regards to the production of vaccines and the functioning of immunity and much more, in order to keep the volumes adequate. If it seems to you that some question is too simplified / something important is missing - write in the comments, I will supplement the article.