Britain opts for mix-and-match vaccinations, troubled experts

Representatives of Public Health England and AstraZeneca did not respond to requests for comment.

Both Pfizer’s and AstraZeneca’s vaccines introduce a protein called spike into the body which, although not contagious, can teach immune cells to recognize and fight the real coronavirus.

But the vaccines give their immunological lessons through different methods, and do not contain equivalent ingredients. While Pfizer’s vaccine depends on a molecule called messenger RNA, or mRNA, packaged in fatty bubbles, AstraZeneca’s shots are designed around a virus shell that produces DNA, a cousin of mRNA.

Both vaccines are intended to be administered in two-shot regimens, delivered three or four weeks apart. Although the first shot of each vaccine is slightly effective in preventing Covid-19, it is the second dose – intended as a kind of molecular review session for the immune system – that clinches the protection process.

Although it is possible that the exchange of one vaccine for another can still teach the body to recognize the coronavirus, it is still a scientific gamble. With different ingredients in each vaccine, it is possible that people will not benefit as much from a second shot. If you mix and match, it can also be more difficult to gather clear data on the safety of vaccines.

Without evidence to support this, the approach to hybrid vaccination seems ‘premature’, said Saad Omer, a vaccination expert at Yale University. This is still not without precedent: health authorities such as the CDC have previously said that if it is impossible to deliver doses of a vaccine from the same manufacturer, ‘suppliers must administer the vaccine they have available’ to inject an injection plan. finish.

In a controversial move this week, the British government also decided to advance the deployment of vaccines and deliver as many first doses to humans as possible – a step that could delay second shots to 12 weeks.

The rapid use can provide more people with partial protection against the virus in the short term. But some experts, including dr. Moore, is concerned that it could also be unwise and that it could threaten vulnerable populations.

Source