Not to take a single dose vaccine before trials?

[prowlingbrooms]

That’s it really
I’m not an anti vaxxer - I’ve had every shot I’ve ever needed plus tons more as I lived in tropical climes for years. My kids too. But I’m not taking a single dose / mixed dose shot against the advice of the manufacturer/ without trials (and now against Dr Faucis example, whom I trust more than our rat bag of ad hoc leadership)
I am also incandescent with rage that my parents were given the first shot without informed consent ie on the basis that it was being administered experimentally!
Do you agree - and if not, why not

[quote WithGusto2]@FatCatThinCat where is your evidence that they’re going to mix the different types (manufacturers of) of the vaccine?

Totally anecdotal but when DC had the chicken pox vaccine I was told the first does was 70% protection and they needed to have the booster within 3 months to take that to over 90% and when I enquired to book the booster I had to wait a bit as they were having trouble getting hold of the brand DC had originally had. So listening to the changes about the vaccination programme I took that the 3 months and not mixing brands is pretty universal - could be wrong.[/quote]
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/948757/Greenbook_chapter_14a_v4.pdf

I would take a single vaccine but I think they should be honouring the second dose for those who have already had the first dose.

You should read the JCVI Short Statement on their rationale for recommending delay of booster shots to 12 weeks so that as many as possible can receive the prime shots. It has been well thought out.

www.google.com/search?q=short+statement+from+the+jcvi+-+optimising+covid+19+vaccination+for+maximum+short+term+impact&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBGB891GB891&oq=short+statement+from+the+jcvi+-+optimising+covid+19+vaccination+for+maximum+short+term+impact&aqs=chrome..69i57.16280j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

There is also evidence from mathematical modelling in flu pandemics that this is the best strategy.

This twitter thread by Sandy Douglas explains about Pfizer

There’s some anxiety Pfizer haven’t endorsed UK dose-spacing policy.

1. What they can say is tightly regulated (see below).
2. It’s V common for expert-guided policy on use of meds to differ from pharma
3. Why would they? All their product is sold, why make tricky judgments?

twitter.com/sandyddouglas/status/1344987903835971584?s=19

I would have one dose of the vaccine then another 12 weeks later, no problem. And I think the govt is right to get as many first doses to vulnerable people as possible.

I agree with your point that those who received the first dose with the understanding the second would be in three weeks, should have the second in three weeks. You can't change the goalposts half way through. Plus all the hours to phone them all and rearrange is a huge waste.

I half wonder if part of the govt's reasoning is also not only to get as many first doses out as possible, but to prevent a large group of people from thinking they are fully protected and socialising as normal. Not the first wave of people in care homes and NHS staff, but the healthy 60 and 70 year olds in a few weeks/ months who would likely be tempted to return to normal after the two doses, some of whom would baulk at wearing masks and distancing as would be still necessary. Sadly, most people of all ages are somewhat selfish and I could foresee a lot of them refusing masks/ distancing/ precautions if they were protected. Especially as the only ones not protected by then would be younger and " not likely to die".

As CathyandClare has pointed out there is evidence that one dose gives protection after 10 days. It's not as though the government is going out on a limb with no evidence at all for a single dose doing anything.

The trial was not set up to prove that a single dose could work but the data from that trial do suggest good levels of immunity after the first dose. Look at that graph. Delaying the 2nd dose is a gamble but it is not without evidence.

If we do it the scientifically pure way and give a small number of people 2 injections it will be a drop in the ocean. We need to get more people
Vaccinated right now before the NHS goes under. We are close to breaking point, lockdowns are no longer working because they've been watered down so much and people will not comply any longer. We are out of options and we need to get the vaccine coverage as high as we can as fast as we can to avoid more deaths.

If that means one dose of Pfizer and another in 12 weeks I'd say you should still count yourself very lucky. Very few people will be getting that

If it means Oxford vaccine which is a bit less effective but we have more of then absolutely we need to do that.

If it means mixing then that's where I personally would draw the line because there really is no evidence at all on that.

I said yes on your other thread on the same topic.
Yes again. Can't wait!

There are 2.2 million over 80s. 1 million vaccinations carried out so far, maybe half NHS/care workers and half over 80s (I'd possibly say more have gone to the care workers but I don't know the stats). So let's say if 500,000 over 80s have been done, so what has happened is it's been a lottery as to whether the over 80s have had it - who picked up the phone, who's name is A to J alphabetically (however it's been given out in that area). So yes, your parents (the lucky over 80s who now have some protection) may well feel disappointed that they are not getting their second dose quite yet, but I feel much happier that my 90 year grandmother (one of those 1.7 million over 80s who still haven't had any vaccination) may well now get that first dose much sooner and have some protection instead of non.

YOU may disagree with the science in your expert opinion (and of course the manufacturers are never going to say, 'no go ahead and only give one dose') but a lot of experts agree with the mathematicaly probable outcome of giving double the number of the most vulnerable people protection from one dose to keep them from being hospitalised (and it has been shown in the research from the manufacturers that one dose does give a lot of protection).

If there we 50 million double doses of the vaccine in the uk right now, then I might agree with you. But we're also working with limited stock, which is a very good reason for rolling it out as one dose for as many as possible right now.

As it happens, I'm not in the UK at the moment. I'm in a country that only started vaccinating with Pfizer a few days ago, and will not even approve Oxford until the end of Jan, so even if they carry on with their double dose policy, they'll still be well behind the UK, and no one here will have had a double dose anyway until the end of Jan at the earliest.

For your own mental wellbeing, I'd try a shift in mindset to:

• how lucky I am that my parents now have some protection from serious illness, when many other over 80s and younger CEV don't even have an appointment yet
• how lucky I am to be in UK where the vaccinations stared much earlier than other countries
• it's not medically dangerous to have one dose in terms of getting the vaccine so it would be ridiculous if I didn't even take the one dose being offered to me free of charge at the earliest possible time I can get it
• whoever have made this decision have done so purely on the basis that they (in their combined EXPERT opinions) believe that this is the very best way to save the most lives and keep as many people out of ICU as possible. I'm very anti-conservative policy in general and don't for one minute believe that the politicians care one bit about my family, but I do believe that they (and the medical experts who have led on this decision) want the same thing - and that's for my family members to not end up in hospital with Covid.

A lot of other countries are looking at delaying the second vaccine- they just haven't made a decision yet because they're only just giving out the first.

@FatCatThinCat but your scientist DH is completely missing the point of all the research into the vaccine showing it minimising severe illness after the first dose.
So you're comparing 50 people who have had 2 jabs and now at 95% prevention rate, with 100 people with 1 jab but who are now all much much more unlikely to end up seriously ill in hospital. Expand that out into millions and statistically it will have a huge impact on the crisis in hospitals (and the number of deaths).

I am CV and I work in a primary school. If one dose would afford me some protection against this virus, I would gladly take that over the lack of protection we currently have. We won't be opening to all pupils next week, kw and vulnerable children only, but just before Christmas saw a rise in the number of pupils testing positive.
I heard an interview on the radio this morning (can't remember name of interviewee, sorry) where it was stated that after secondary age pupils, primary school age children is currently the second must highly infected age group. And yes, we've heard that apparently children are not as badly affected / don't pass it on as easily etc, but I suspect that the new variant may change that.
So, if anyone is thinking of refusing the vaccine because they don't want the longer gap between the first and second dose, I'll happily take your place along with many of my colleagues.

It's not a single dose. All they are doing is extending the time between one dose and another, so that they can get more people partial protection.

Where I do think the government is wrong is with those who've already had their first dose - I would have honoured existing appointments for 2nd doses though, as changing them is confusing and wastes admin time. And I agree there is potentially an ethics issue too. But not for people who've not had the first dose yet (who will now get their first dose sooner).

(and of course the manufacturers are never going to say, 'no go ahead and only give one dose')

That’s not what’s being proposed. It’s a delay between dose one and dose two so more people can be vaccinated quickly while supplies of vaccine are coming online. The same about of vaccine will still be needed.

I didn't know they were planning on only giving one "shot" of this in America. How odd. I hadn't seen any kind of statement from Fauci about that. Glad we're not doing that in the UK.

@prowlingbrooms

Also their crushing disappointment.it’s more than disappointment really - these over eighties have been sheltering in place for months - and then to be given hope and to have it pulled away seems incredibly cruel.

I have relatives affected by this. They knew they were going to have to continue masking, social distancing etc. while everyone else was being vaccinated and they'd need to do that for months.

They're OK about the delay as they understand the population argument v. their immediate needs and they've considered that even with what Pfizer does know, it wasn't clear that people who had the 2 vax at the 3 week intervale wouldn't need another dose (originally a 3rd) time to get them through Winter 2021. A delayed dose might well protect them for that.

I know everybody is different in how they react to things.

[quote Thatsnotmynamename]@FatCatThinCat but your scientist DH is completely missing the point of all the research into the vaccine showing it minimising severe illness after the first dose.
So you're comparing 50 people who have had 2 jabs and now at 95% prevention rate, with 100 people with 1 jab but who are now all much much more unlikely to end up seriously ill in hospital. Expand that out into millions and statistically it will have a huge impact on the crisis in hospitals (and the number of deaths).[/quote]
Yup!

And it feels like it's the same people who say that we should limit everything in our lives to reduce the spread of the virus- eg crush the economy, small businesses, children's education, mental health. All because we need to protect ourselves and the NHS from the virus.

But lets make sure that fewer people receive near immunity because the manufacturers say so.

The manufacturer's have to agree with the exact terms of their licence - any different and they are in deep trouble.
The regulators and medical and scientific leaders have the knowledge and experience to make adjustments.
I am happy for my second dose due next week to go to one my patients and I can have their dose in Feb or march.
What does make me angry is people going out partying, meeting in houses and not wearing masks in public because it goes against their freedom (I have to wear my mask for 11 hours a day on working days)

I’d take whatever they can give me!

I hope they don’t fuck it up by rushing at the whole thing though.

@PurpleDaisies

I would take a single vaccine but I think they should be honouring the second dose for those who have already had the first dose.

They are.

I'd rather 1000 people with 1 dose than 500 with two, just for the time being.

@WhatTiggersDoBest

I didn't know they were planning on only giving one "shot" of this in America. How odd. I hadn't seen any kind of statement from Fauci about that. Glad we're not doing that in the UK.

It's the opposite. The US are following Pfizer's directions.

The American infectious disease expert Dr Anthony Fauci has said he does not agree with the UK’s approach of delaying the second dose of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine.

On Friday, Dr Fauci told CNN that the United States would not be following in the UK’s footsteps and would follow Pfizer and BioNTech’s guidance to administer the second dose of its vaccine three weeks after the first.

Pfizer have stated they have no evidence of the vaccines efficacy beyond 21 days, without the follow-up second dose given then.

Has that changed today @Nanny0gg? That wasn’t the situation being reported yesterday.

It might not have been totally clear but I meant honouring the second dose at the original interval.

You dont have to put anything in your body that you're not comfortable with.

As far as elderly PILs are concerned, I feel that anything is better than nothing. The wait is more risk to them than anything. But I disagree with the governments plan, it'll be a massive waste of resources and will put people at more risk if they believe they have protection when they dont.

We know that the size of the vaccine and the timing of the second dose matter.

So I'm not in favour of messing with it cheers.

Let alone giving a second dose of a completely different vaccine.

The only reason to take it is that it's effective and has been tested as such.

There's no evidence that doing it the way our government want even works. We don't know if it has negative effects to do it that way.

We only know what they tested. And they never tested this.

www.nytimes.com/2021/01/01/health/coronavirus-vaccines-britain.html#click=t.co/T94lMD07cW

Let alone giving a second dose of a completely different vaccine.

Public health England have responded to rumours of this saying this won’t happen. You’ll get the same vaccine as before.

Fwiw, mixing vaccines can give better immunity but this needs to be trialled first, and not on the mass population!

Here’s the tweet. Just to correct myself a bit, they’ve said it could extremely rarely happen if the first vaccine you had wasn’t available but that wasn’t recommended.