Many want a corona vaccination - but not so much with the Astrazeneca vaccine.
Right?
An expert provides us with an analysis.
There is less trust in Astrazeneca's vaccine than in active ingredients from other manufacturers.
Has the British-Swedish * pharmaceutical company worked worse than Biontech and Moderna * - or are we over-cautious?
A renowned expert advises: Astrazeneca is definitely much better than nothing.
Munich
-
When it comes to corona vaccinations *, the uncertainty among the population has a name: Astrazeneca.
It feels as if the vaccine that researchers from Oxford have developed is as popular in Germany as porridge, eel aspic or Scottish eggs.
Even doctors have secret doubts.
Professor Peter Kremsner's phone rang often on Thursday, and medical colleagues wanted to know from the chief infectious agent at the University of Tübingen what to think of this vaccine.
“Astrazeneca is clearly worse than the other two approved vaccines, but it is better than its reputation.
That's why I advise everyone: Better get vaccinated with Astrazeneca than not at all, ”says Kremsner.
The
vaccine expert analyzes strengths and weaknesses
for
Münchner Merkur
.
Astrazeneca vaccine against Covid-19: "Also protects well against severe courses"
How well does Astrazeneca really work?
The effectiveness is given with about 60 percent, Biontech and Moderna achieve about 95 percent.
That quantifies the protection rate against Covid-19 * disease in general.
“This means all forms of illness - from very mild symptoms to death.
However, it seems to be the case that Astrazeneca, like the other corona vaccines, also provides good protection against severe courses, ”explains Kremsner.
However, this is not yet adequately supported by data.
What's the big difference?
The fact is: the three vaccines were developed using different technologies.
Biontech and Moderna rely on messenger RNA vaccines.
In the process - explained in a simplified way - building instructions for certain protein components of the coronavirus * are given.
In the course of a chain of reactions, antibodies and T cells are formed.
These antibodies catch the viruses and destroy them.
Astrazeneca vaccine is not an mRNA, but a vector vaccine like Sputniv V.
Instead of this new and highly effective mRNA principle, Astrazeneca relies on modified adenoviruses.
These converted cold viruses serve as a means of transport to transport bits of genetic material from the coronavirus into the cells.
The immune system is trained to fight off the pathogen.
Means based on this carrier technology are called vector vaccines.
However, these do not necessarily have to work worse than mRNA vaccines, as Russian scientists have proven: Their vector vaccine Sputnik V achieves an effectiveness of 92 percent.
"It seems to be a very good vaccine," said Kremsner.
Approval in the EU should only be a matter of time.
Corona vaccine debate: do mutations negate effectiveness?
Is Astrazeneca really poorly tolerated?
Those who get vaccinated against corona can have symptoms for a day or two - no matter what drug they are given.
According to the expert: "The younger the worse, the older the better."
Do the mutations * undermine the effectiveness of the vaccines?
"Three scientific papers that have just been published in the
New England Journal of Medicine
show that the mutations are very unlikely to have any effect on effectiveness," says Kremsner: "While you usually only have one starting point for an antibiotic, for example, In order to fight the pathogen, there are many, about ten such starting points for a vaccine, maybe even 30 or even more.
A lot would have to come together that would make a vaccine work significantly worse or not at all. ”He sees“ no great, immediate danger ”.
* Merkur.de is part of the Ippen-Digital editorial network.