MHRA approves Pfizer jab for use in UK

[AuntieStella]

News just breaking on BBC

@Hoppinggreen

Can’t state my source for reasons of anonymity but I know some BionTech staff HAVE had the vaccine, including the top man himself

I wouldn't expect anything else. They would be mad not to.

Exactly so if the people with more information than everyone else are happy to have it then surely that’s more reassuring than some muppet on FB saying what “they’ve heard”

Puzzledandpissedoff

lungworm? Not a problem, they don’t get Covid-19. That'll prove the vaccination works! I won't get it.

@MilesJuppIsMyBitch

I take it 0.3 is a good reading so my congrats that your body is behaving itself!

DD had to SI (cases in her school) but she went to her father’s for it, so aside from the original ‘oh crap this is real’ moment we were fine and no one became symptomatic

I’ll have my sleeve rolled up ready! I don’t know if my usual hospital will be a hub but I’ll go anywhere!

Love the lungworm comment

Lungworm? Not a problem, they don’t get Covid-19. That'll prove the vaccination works! I won't get it

A very valid point, Petronius

@iVampire It's not great, but I'm not neutropenic, so it'll do

That must have been frightening for you both. I'm glad she didn't come down with it!

I don't think we'll know what to do with all the nervous energy once this is over. Can you imagine shopping? Getting on a train? Going to a pub? I'm going to be a wreck, I think.

Can't wait though.

@MilesJuppIsAnOldSlutOnJunk - what brought on the name change ?

I don’t really understand the numbers, except for my own (anything starting 0.0 is good, and I’m down to 0.05) Fingers crossed that you stay out of neutropenia and you stay well through this winter

I’m not sure what I’m looking forward to most when I can have normal person rules, rather than the ‘you don’t have to shield, but please don’t do anything whatsoever near anyone else ever’ rules

I fall into 4 of the risk groups near the top of the list of people who need vaccinating asap. But I will be saying no thank you. Why? Because there is no data whatsoever in respect of the safety of the vaccination (or any of the others), for individuals who are not healthy!

If you read the report attached to one of the first of the responses to this OP, you will see that it has been tested on HEALTHY individuals only.

I take over 20 different prescribed medications, many of which are very finely balanced in respect of interactions, I'm not going to be a guinea pig for our government, but more importantly I'd prefer to live with the known risks of the virus than the unknown risks of a vaccination that is COMPLETELY new.

Because there is no data whatsoever in respect of the safety of the vaccination (or any of the others), for individuals who are not healthy!

That’s not true, they’re covered in the sample. The data is not public knowledge, but has been presented to the approval board.

I'm sorry but read the report (the green pap e r), Pfizer trialed with HEALTHY individuals aged 12 - >65.

This was the trial group for the double blind trial I also 2,3,& 4.

I have asked Pfizer if they had included those with concurrent health problems and if they could offer any information about t h e safety of their vaccine for someone taking my medications, they apologised and said no a n d advised me to take note of the data issued in relation to the trial group. My GP made the same enquiries to Pfizer, our regional health authority and our local health panel, all came back with the same information.

Moderna has undertaken a very small trial cohort (189) of people with a number of very specific Conditions. And Oxford has carried out a very small trials involving people with breathing difficulties.

I'm not anti vac, in discussions with my husband I have tried to encourage him to have the vaccination from Pfizor, or Oxford. Moderna is a different kettle of fish, as it is using a product never yet used by humans.

@SallyB392

Moderna is a different kettle of fish, as it is using a product never yet used by humans.

I understand that both Pfizer and Moderna are mRNA vaccines. Could you advise on how Moderna differs from Pfizer (as admittedly I have been reading more on the latter)?

Purplefig

Reading over the comments the title of the article is misleading and aN insufficient poll . Also polls can be skewed. See the below comment about the poll from a Dr :

This is silly. They do not tell us the total number of doctors who they surveyed. And of that total, what was the percentage who responded either yes or no to receiving vaccine, and what percentage did not bother responding at all. These percentages would reveal if it was only a minor fraction of the total that bothered to respond to the survey. And knowing this would tell everyone whether the 40% of respondents who declined vaccine is actually representative of the UK medical profession as a whole, or whether the 40% represent a tiny & select fraction of the whole UK profession. Then it will be clear if the title of this article is misleading or appropriate

I am quite worried about news from Sage that vaccine will only last for 90 days. There is no way on earth there is the manufacturing capacity to make and give everyone a jab every 3 months, especially with the Pfizer vaccine. Maybe we might have a shot with the Oxford one but I am very down about this news today.

@virucidalmaniac

I am quite worried about news from Sage that vaccine will only last for 90 days. There is no way on earth there is the manufacturing capacity to make and give everyone a jab every 3 months, especially with the Pfizer vaccine. Maybe we might have a shot with the Oxford one but I am very down about this news today.

What are they basing this on?

Who knows
SAGE seem to want the current restrictions and removal of liberties to be permanent it's very worrying

I think its a report from NERVTAG

This is the NERVTAG paper which contains the '90 day' paragraph (para 8)

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/940896/S907_NERVTAG_certifying_COVID_immunity.pdf

It boils down to saying that no known coronavirus confers under 3 months immunity and there's no reason to think this one will be less. It

Worth a read if the whole paper if you're interested in this kind of thing

[quote iVampire]@MilesJuppIsAnOldSlutOnJunk - what brought on the name change ?

I don’t really understand the numbers, except for my own (anything starting 0.0 is good, and I’m down to 0.05) Fingers crossed that you stay out of neutropenia and you stay well through this winter

I’m not sure what I’m looking forward to most when I can have normal person rules, rather than the ‘you don’t have to shield, but please don’t do anything whatsoever near anyone else ever’ rules[/quote]
@iVampire it's my Christmas name . (From The Fairytale of NY).

Thanks for document. I don’t read this as having any information on how long immunity from vaccine will last. I think there’s been cross wires? (Re pp and Sage commenting on only three months)

The duration isn’t yet known.

Within one month of natural infection, a high proportion of people will develop immunity which is protective against disease caused by reinfection (high confidence). This protection is likely to persist for at least three months (moderate confidence). The level of protection against subclinical re-infection (as opposed to disease) is uncertain.

28 days after the first dose with an effective vaccine, a high proportion of people develop immunity which is protective against disease caused by reinfection (high confidence). The duration of protection is not yet known. The level of protection against subclinical infection is uncertain and we need to see secondary endpoint data from the vaccine trials that assess infection.

It’s not accurate to say the vaccine is completely new, though close.

If you’ve got the time, read this

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55041371

If you haven’t, the following quotes may help,

The biggest misconception is the work on the vaccine started when the pandemic began.

Scientists took a common cold virus that infected chimpanzees and engineered it to become the building block of a vaccine against almost anything.

It sounds strange to say it, almost perverse, but it was lucky that the pandemic was caused by a coronavirus.

Making a vaccine is very expensive.

They had some funding from the university, but they had a crucial advantage over other groups around the world.

But as the pandemic tightened its grip on the world and country after country descended into lockdown, the money started to flow. Production of the vaccine moved to a facility in Italy…

"At one point we had to charter a plane, the vaccine was in Italy and we had clinics here the next morning," said Prof Gilbert.

...once animal trials had shown the vaccine was safe, the researchers were able to begin human trials of the vaccine on 23 April.

Hope that helps.

I'm gonna get berated here for saying this I'm sure, but there is no way in hell I'm taking it to be honest.

There may be pharmacists and scientists working around the clock to create it but quite frankly there are SO many pieces of literature, released BY PFIZER themselves proclaiming that they don't know how safe it is for people who take other medications, people who are pregnant, they have no clue how it interacts in terms of future potential fertility, and that they have no clue of the effect on children, which is why under 16's can't have it.

I think it's insane they they've also been granted total legal immunity from any potential complications to people that may arise from having this vaccine. Why is that necessary... well because the drug is effectively untested.... We are the so called guinea pigs for this, it's like "well yeah release it and THEN we'll see what effects it has on people." there's no clinical trials, no years of studies, no peer reviews... It's a total pot luck situation and I'll be honest I'm not keen on that.

I'm gonna get called an antivaxxer probably, and I literally am not in the slightest, I think everyone having vaccinations is imperative to the survival of the weaker and sicker of us, I've had mine and my son has had his, but I'm all for tested and proven drugs, not ones that are pushed through as quick as possible (even though I understand the situation surrounding it causes a need for that)...
I just can't forsee myself taking this....

You’ll be berated if you turn out to be an anti vaxxer.

You may be corrected but that’s not the same as being berated. Would you be prepared to listen or would we be wasting our time?

‘well because the drug is effectively untested.... We are the so called guinea pigs for this, it's like "well yeah release it and THEN we'll see what effects it has on people." there's no clinical trials, ‘

What on earth are you talking about? What do you think they’ve been doing all summer and autumn? If it was untested they could have handed it out in April. Instead they have spent the intervening months running large scale trials involving tens of thousands of people all over the world to confirm it’s safe and that it works.
Where in God’s name did you get the idea it hasn’t been tested?

@Alastria
There may be pharmacists and scientists working around the clock to create it but quite frankly there are SO many pieces of literature, released BY PFIZER themselves proclaiming that they don't know how safe it is for people who take other medications, people who are pregnant,

It’s normal to test new vaccines or drugs on a large cohort of “normal” people first. More work can then be done on its suitability for people who take other medications, have other conditions or are pregnant. And obviously the manufacturers have to release this information - would you prefer that they didn’t?

and that they have no clue of the effect on children, which is why under 16's can't have it.

The vaccine has not (yet) been tested on children so will not be licensed for them, so as things stand they don’t need to have a clue. If in the future it seems that children will need to have the vaccine they will carry out clinical trials beforehand.

.....the drug is effectively untested.... We are the so called guinea pigs for this, it's like "well yeah release it and THEN we'll see what effects it has on people." there's no clinical trials, no years of studies, no peer reviews... It's a total pot luck situation and I'll be honest I'm not keen on that.

So 43,000 people have taken part in the Pfizer clinical trials, but according to you there have been no clinical trials.

I'm gonna get called an antivaxxer probably, and I literally am not in the slightest

I have no idea whether you’re an antivaxxer, but you’re certainly a fantasist. I don’t think it is the manufacturers who have “no clue*