Worried that the military and NHS are on standby to deliver vaccines

[BurningRose]

Just heard this on the BBC news at 6.Does this mean the military will be injecting people? Will it be mandatory for certain groups? This is rather worrying.

What with the debate already raging as to order of priority, you can almost see some, albeit very limited, usefulness to the antivvaxxer conspiracy theorists. It's not as if there isn't a long queue of those who do want to take the protection offered. Save the hospital beds and Long Covid treatment clinics for the minority who don't want a vaccine. It will be a minority btw, vocal that it is. Studies have already indicated that the majority very much want a vaccine. The take up of the flu vaccine also gives a good idea. Several Eastern European countries - where take up is usually low, have seen unprecedented demand. Like here, there's a now a shortage.

Could the people who feel the vaccine has ‘been rushed through’ please explain what steps they think have been skipped over?

Because my understanding from following this is that what’s been sped up are the things that can be sped up in this situation: waiting for funding, waiting for approval, waiting for more funding, waiting to get enough volunteers, waiting to see if enough of those volunteers get infected, companies not wanting to take the financial risk of moving on to later stages and bigger trials until they know it’s worth their while. Obviously, the scenario here means all of those aren’t issues any more.

But the way various people are talking about this makes it sound like they think there’s some extra essential safety stage where volunteers are watched for years for long-term effects before the vaccine is approved for any kind of use, and that’s not happening here. But that’s not a stage that happens with other vaccines either - side-effects turning up years down the line just aren’t a big concern, because there is not really any way for vaccines to do that. (Side-effects that only happen to like 1 in 50,000 people are more likely to be something to watch for, which is why they continue safety monitoring after vaccines first start getting rolled out.)

It would be unethical for governments to start using a vaccine that wasn’t properly tested. But once it has been tested it would also be unethical to NOT use a vaccine that worked, if regulators had all the data they needed to make a decision, when it could save a lot of lives. The MHRA are not going to go “oooh well this could maybe stop fifty thousand people from dying, and were happy we’ve got all the safety data we need to approve it for emergency use, but let’s just hold off and drum out fingers on the table for three years so people don’t feel it’s rushed.”

That's a really good post GoldenOmber
Explains it all well.

People should remember that each year we have a different (new) flu jab.

@RoseAndRose Human Medicines regulation 2012.
limited classes of HCP can administer under PGD currently . If prescribed this would need to be done for each individual patient by a Dr or nurse/ pharmacist independent prescriber. That’s not going to happen for mass immunisations. A patient giving themselves an injection which has been prescribed for them is a different situation to a HCP giving it to them.

No @BurningRose god no it wont be soldiers vaccinating !

It will be nurses ... i know cos iv signed up to be part of the vaccination team in my area .
I am sooooo excited about this.

When i got the email at work to say we getting vaccine ready it was literally the best news.

@GoldenOmber I've already set out my reason why and I'm the company track record and history that is enough to make me cautious about having it

As for flu jab mentioned by another poster, they still predict what strains might appear and can get it wrong.

I have never had the flu jab since it was released because I dont feel I need it, I have never come down with the flu in all those years and cannot even recall the last time i had a cold in the past 5 years. Maybe when I'm much much older I may change my mind or maybe I won't. But again its my body, my decision and my choice.

I'm sure people will still come and tell me that I have to have the flu jab

@GoldenOmber I've already set out my reason why and I'm the company track record and history that is enough to make me cautious about having it

I didn’t ask about Pfizer though, I asked what it was specifically that people feel has been ‘rushed through’.

Things happen faster in emergencies. There is a big difference between admin/funding steps being ‘rushed through’ (good!) and between essential safety testing being ‘rushed through’ (would be bad but does not seem to have happened).

@GoldenOmber, they want to skip over the licensing process don’t they? So submit safety and efficacy studies as usual to the MHRA but not wait for the product licence to be granted. (Although they say they will be peer reviewed and released for inspection) And remove civil liability from the pharmaceutical companies and HCP so they can’t be sued if someone has a bad reaction. What I don’t understand is why if all the studies are there and they have been peer reviewed, why can’t they just rush through the granting of the licence as it would appear that all the work has been done? I hope they don’t go down that route as I feel it is fuelling mistrust. A lot of the public aren’t aware of the licensing process and implications of using unlicensed medicines but I see a lot of people have latched on to the removal of liability aspect of the proposals.

It does have everything to do with Pfizer with their track record of producing drugs or vaccines!

I'm notnm prepared to trust their products they put out based knt heir past history thank you very much

Cutting down timescales and fast tracking is one thing but fundamentally this is a company that has done many dubious nd shady things in the past so much so there have been court cases and settlement s and so I have every right to be cautious.

No they don’t want to skip over licensing, they’re planning to apply for emergency use while the licensing stuff is taking place. That has happened with other drugs too, there’s already room for this in the law. The MHRA will still get to call the shots on whether that emergency use is granted or not - it won’t be a case of Pfizer or whoever handing over data to the MHRA and then starting to inject people while they’re reading through it.

You aren’t reading what I’m saying, cyclingmad.

I’m sure you feel very strongly about Pfizer. But I am not asking “cyclingmad, why are you worried about this vaccine?” I’m asking “Could the people who feel the vaccine has ‘been rushed through’ please explain what steps they think have been skipped over?”

As I said plenty of people happy to have it then go right ahead and get in line, as it happens my age group isn't even on the list yet so it'll be a while at least.

Again removal of any liability...why do that in all these decades of vaccines being produced and they have had every opportunity to introduce that change to law, but no they never did only now.....is it because they know its outside of usual time frames and to mitigate liability incase of side effects coming up so they cannot be held accountable. Otherwise what other reason do they have for making this change?

"But with, you know, added risks of vaccine injury and side effects or messing with your dna.
Don't say I didn't warn you about side effects"

Interesting point this. In the last 10 years, only 14 confirmed cases of vaccine "damage" (note, not death) were recorded in the UK.

That's 14 cases, across 10 years. Equivalent to 0.003 cases a day.

Whereas C-19 (and I'm being generous here, averaging cases over a full year) has resulted in 3380 cases a day this year in the U.K. and 136 deaths per day.

OP, you may not be able to assess basic scientific literature, or employ critical thinking. But as a risk assessment, those numbers are pretty clear to anyone who can count to at least one.

I doubt it will be mandatory. I've just read a daily mail article about a poll showing people are glad about the vaccine but want politicians to have it first to prove it's safe. My own view on this, if I want to be cynical, is that the poll was done in Westminster, as I'm sure they would be happy to be first in the queue for a limited vaccine, as they have only bought enough for a third of the population. I seem to be in the minority of daily mail readers though, as so many comments are from people suspicious of the vaccine and worried that they will be forced to have it, or saying there is no way in hell they will be having it. Who would have thought there were so many people who were anti-covid-vaccine, either because they are wary of side effects of a new vaccine or are all out conspiracy theorists who think the vaccine is a master plot by some evil villain bent on controlling the masses.

@SheepandCow

What with the debate already raging as to order of priority, you can almost see some, albeit very limited, usefulness to the antivvaxxer conspiracy theorists. It's not as if there isn't a long queue of those who do want to take the protection offered. Save the hospital beds and Long Covid treatment clinics for the minority who don't want a vaccine. It will be a minority btw, vocal that it is. Studies have already indicated that the majority very much want a vaccine. The take up of the flu vaccine also gives a good idea. Several Eastern European countries - where take up is usually low, have seen unprecedented demand. Like here, there's a now a shortage.

I thought the same thing, but agree that the anti-vaxers are a tiny percentage, vocal as they are.

Emergency use is an unlicensed medicine though? Which should only be used if there is no licensed alternative and with the patients knowledge and consent. The process for emergency use is generally for niche medicines used for serious diseases in which the person has a lot to gain. Is it appropriate if you’re giving a vaccine to a perfectly healthy person at low risk? They’ve said it will be reviewed within a year, I quoted your ‘skipped over’ but yes put on hold is more the case. It is not the normal process and is not what happens for any other vaccine, just trying to answer your question of what is different to other vaccines

Which should only be used if there is no licensed alternative and with the patients knowledge and consent.

Which of those do you think wouldn’t apply here?

And there is precedent for vaccines getting approved for emergency use by regulators while the licensing process is going on (not put on hold!). Ebola most recently, I think maybe the dengue vaccine? It’s enough of a thing that the WHO have guidance around it, it’s not like it’s a big unprecedented step nobody’s considered trying before.

I dont need to be monitored for 15 mins when I r had other vaccines...so why is this different?

I've always been told to wait around after a flu vaccine - just because you haven't been doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

issue involves ethnic minorities and African Americans, which account for a higher percentage of severe cases of Covid-19. While Pfizer has expanded its trial to 44,000 from 30,000 to increase the number of participants from these populations, it has only just done this. It is unlikely that the drugmaker will have enough data for its vaccine in these populations if it decides to file for regulatory approval before the full trial has completed.

So no I don't find myself wanting to rush to have a vaccine that is gping to unlicensed without full trial is completed and being in the BAME category the fact they only just included those in the trials I mean that in itself seems pretty stupid to have not included enough in the first place - I will wait thank you!

This article from I'd say a farily reputable paper and contains factual information is also another reason why: www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-vaccine-pandemic-swine-flu-covid-a9693721.html

It clearly says that in the past where vaccines were rished through normal steps were not taken. They don't specify what they are but its one of the key findings from historic examples.

And this is what I fully support in terms of being provided the right information and transparently so I can make an informed decision but right now there isn't that information when you dig deeper than the headline of this amazing vaccine.

The government must be prepared to have a grown up conversation about the risks and benefits of a Covid-19 vaccine. It must not hide any details of deals with manufacturers and it must publicly state its support for those rare instances when something goes wrong.

Interesting point this. In the last 10 years, only 14 confirmed cases of vaccine "damage" (note, not death) were recorded in the UK.

Does this include pandemrix? NHS quote risk of narcolepsy as 1 in 50-55000. Some vaccines do have potentially serious side effects, including yellow fever and measles vaccine. the risk is very much less than the risk of the disease itself. The government have already made it clear this vaccine is not mandatory (obviously it can’t control what other countries require if you want to travel to them). Virtually nothing has been released about these vaccines yet, surely best thing to do is to wait for the information to make a decision. Don’t personally see how people can say they’ve made an informed decision to decline the vaccine without any information available!

@Staffy1

I doubt it will be mandatory. I've just read a daily mail article about a poll showing people are glad about the vaccine but want politicians to have it first to prove it's safe. My own view on this, if I want to be cynical, is that the poll was done in Westminster, as I'm sure they would be happy to be first in the queue for a limited vaccine, as they have only bought enough for a third of the population. I seem to be in the minority of daily mail readers though, as so many comments are from people suspicious of the vaccine and worried that they will be forced to have it, or saying there is no way in hell they will be having it. Who would have thought there were so many people who were anti-covid-vaccine, either because they are wary of side effects of a new vaccine or are all out conspiracy theorists who think the vaccine is a master plot by some evil villain bent on controlling the masses.

We think alike

I think we, the general public, should give our MPs a Christmas present.... volunteer to take their place and go first with the vaccine. Season of goodwill and all that.

So far experts estimate 10-15% of patients develop Long Covid. That's just at this early stage. Who knows what hidden damage (no symptoms for now) might come to light in the future.

I'd wager Long Covid sufferers far outnumber the very rare cases of vaccine related issues. Anything can be dangerous for a small minority. Food allergies for example. Nuts can be deadly for a minority but are generally healthy (as part of a balanced diet) for the majority.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/troops-carrying-out-coronavirus-test-22989931

Soldiers from coronavirus test regiment 'broke lockdown with illegal drug party'
EXCLUSIVE: Royal Military Police are probing allegations that up to 21 troops from 32 Engineer Regiment were at a bash at barracks in Catterick, North Yorks, last Thursday

Soldiers from a regiment spearheading Liverpool’s Covid-19 mass tests were at the centre of an alleged Bonfire Night lockdown-breaching drugs scandal last night.

If they test positive for drugs the troops – whose regimental colleagues are helping to spearhead Liverpool’s testing drive – could get stiff jail sentences and be thrown out of the Army.

Many of the troops suspected of being involved have had Compulsory Drugs Tests and officers are awaiting the results.

As many as 21 of them were at the party last Thursday.Officers hauled the 32 Engineer Regiment soldiers in for questioning after reports of a secret barracks “block party” that may have involved drugs in their Yorkshire base.

At least two squadrons of around 200 troops in total from 32 Engineer Regiment are currently in Liverpool, pioneering the mass testing operation in the city.

Officers are believed to have removed social media references to Liverpool even though the Covid-19 testing troops have been in Merseyside for well over a week

Ministry of Defence sources say all of the soldiers involved in Thursday’s incident are from a separate squadron within the regiment and that not one was on the Liverpool mission.

But it is a massive blow to the regiment as a whole and sources told the Daily Mirror senior officers are “absolutely disgusted the rules have been breached.”

Last night a source at the camp said: “This has caused a major problem and senior officers are absolutely disgusted that soldiers have broken lockdown rules.

“If any are found to have taken drugs that night the book will be thrown at them but it is bad enough that their regimental colleagues are on the frontline against Covid-19.

“Just by breaking the rules on social distancing so flagrantly they have tarnished the good work being done by their comrades in Liverpool.”

Royal Military Police are investigating the incident amid claims drugs were used at the illegal bash and that more soldiers were involved.

There were also claims RMP tried to catch the culprits on the night but soldiers fled, hiding off base and even in cars parked within their camp in Catterick, North Yorkshire.

Sources within the camp have also claimed that at least one soldier went AWOL off base to try and slip past the RMP lockdown and avoid being tested but this cannot be verified.

On Friday the entire camp was locked down and it is believed soldiers were then gathered together and bussed to a testing centre some miles away.

Military sources claim the Compulsory Drug Test results will be revealed within the next two weeks but the Mirror understands it could take less time.

Ebola most recently, I think maybe the dengue vaccine?

I’m talking about the UK though as other countries have their own legislation. Since Ebola has a mortality of at least 25% and possibly 90% I don’t think it’s really comparable to covid anyway, your risk benefit ratio is somewhat different.

As for consent, are we saying millions of people being vaccinated as quickly as possible will have product licensing and it’s implications explained to them to obtain true informed consent?