MHRA approves Pfizer jab for use in UK

[AuntieStella]

News just breaking on BBC

I have 2 friends who are NHS nurses, both saying they won't take it as it hasn't been tested enough.

I offered to be in the vaccine trial so as soon as I can I'll be having it.

Fucking amazing news. my sleeve is rolled up and I am ready! I am in the vulnerable group who gets the free flu jab so I THINK but not sure that I am no.6 on the list I have seen in priority. I do not expect I will get it until next year though but great for the people who can and at last some hope in what has been a devastating year all round.

'As a midwife, an important element of my job is to empower women to retain bodily autonomy and to facilitate them to make informed decisions on their care. What is sad is people thinking we lose that right by simply working for the NHS confused'

What a strange comparison. So, say if a woman had complications and was refusing a potentially life saving drug you'd be that busy 'empowering her to retain bodily autonomy' you'd just go along with it?!

No one loses any rights because they work for the nhs. Or have they said it's compulsory and if you refuse you get sacked?

NoSquirrels sorry, I think I got a bit confused about who was talking about what , but I was looking for info that explains that the vaccine is based on spike proteins where other vaccines are not and what the differences are. Maybe @Marks2 is the poster to ask!

Most people who "won't have the vaccine" don't understand anything about scientific trials and funding for research, data analysis, vaccine development or risk assessment

TBF even the pharma companies making these vaccines are still committed to a further 2 years + of trials & follow ups , in 10s of 1000s of people, to prove efficacy and for side effects.

Do people really think that the drugs and medicines they consume are only approved 5-10 years after the completion of Phase III trials?

So much cluelessness about how the process actually works and why it takes so long.

purplefig but that’s an officially declared list of interests. That is very common in big public sector agencies like this, and is done precisely so that people will NOT be personally deciding on things which would benefit them. Me and my colleagues have to declare our interests too, it’s a standard part of process. Which is why it’s on gov.uk, not isecretlyexposedtheMHRA.com

Does that put your mind at rest at all?

• pinkearedcow

purplefig
@satnighttakeaway that’s interesting - but this isn’t just a new vaccine, it’s a brand new TYPE of vaccine which is what concerns me.
In what way is it so different (this is a genuine question, not a snarky one) that we should be concerned?*

Lots of info on how they work if you just put it into Google (also not snarky, but eating breakfast now)! The issue for me is the lack of long term studies. I understand why, but I have decided it’s not a risk I want to take.

@thecatsatonthewall

Most people who "won't have the vaccine" don't understand anything about scientific trials and funding for research, data analysis, vaccine development or risk assessment

TBF even the pharma companies making these vaccines are still committed to a further 2 years + of trials & follow ups , in 10s of 1000s of people, to prove efficacy and for side effects.

Yep it's standard to have monitoring of the safety, side effects and effectiveness of the medicine while it's being used in practice. But people have this fanciful image of every drug they consume having being monitored for decades in case of side effects...

It is true that this particular type of vaccine (RNA) hasn’t been used before, it doesn’t have a very long shelf life and needs to be kept at very cold temps, therefore not a very cost effective way to administer routine vaccines.

One the other (viral vector) vaccines are approved I can’t imagine the RNA ones being continue for much longer, as they are so very expensive. The bbc has a useful table on effectiveness and cost here.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55145696

The only conspiracy is cost over quality, which isn’t really a conspiracy in our nhs is it

I do think some people are in denial that we ARE going to go back to normal and all the things that have helped reduce the spread of Covid over the past 9 months WILL be relaxed/removed

The price for a return to normal is people need to take the vaccine. Some won't but most will need to.

This whole argument is so tiresome.

I absolutely trust the scientists, but none of them would say there is ZERO risk of unforeseen side-effects. Just that it's a very, very low risk.

I also think it would be naive to assume that scientists NEVER get things wrong, even though in this case it's highly unlikely that they will have.

Similarly, I don't think anyone sane would argue that there's ZERO risk of political pressure having been placed on people in any authority or agency, especially given this government's penchant for putting their mates in every conceivable position of power.

So bearing all that in mind, while the risk of long-term health problems or death from COVID-19 is probably higher than the vaccine most people, it is at least understandable why some people are apprehensive about being the first to take it. I don't see any point in mocking them for that and calling them stupid. What does that achieve? Do you think telling a scared person that they're an idiot will change their mind?

Remember in the first lockdown when everybody was going on about how the world will never be the same again, how this whole thing was a chance to reset, to take better care of the environment and each other? To rebuild a sense of community and all that? What a load of bollocks that turned out to be.

I will have the vaccine and can't wait. Its our ticket back to normal life IMO. However, I really hope we aren't going to start vaccine shaming. I think the benefits outweigh the risks, but can totally understand why others might be more cautious or concerned. We have never been in this situation before and I think it is only natural to have reservations.

So how long do you want to stay in lockdown then Michaelpalin?

Years probably.

But the one thing money and night shifts can’t work out is long terms effects.

Actually, scientists are very, very good at predicting long term side effects based on the decades of experience and the exabytes of clinical data for similar treatments and whilst an element of the new vaccines are novel, much is based on well established science. That's not to say they are sure there is zero risk but any risk equation has two sides to it - the largely unquantifiable risks that might materialise if you do something versus the known and quantifiable risks or lost opportunities of not doing something.

People who trot out this "what about long term side effects" think they are making an intelligent contribution but they're not. They generally know the square root of fuck all about pharmacology, the regulatory process, risk assessment or any of the other disciplines that factor in.

Let me ask you this though. What do you define as long term? How long exactly would you want it to be limited to clinical trials before you would be happy for it to be approved for use? 3 years maybe? 5? 10? 30? At what point (in your opinion) do the short term knowns in respect of the damage the virus can do outweigh the longer term unknowns as to what side effects the vaccine(s) might or might never have? We know Covid can be fatal, we know it can have serious health consequences even for people who survive, we know it can spread rapidly in the absence of economy-destroying measures such as lockdown. How long do you propose we accept those known and current risks for fear of completely unknown ones that may well never materialise?

I don’t think it will work, they can’t find a cure for the common cold, influenza, so I doubt they can for this.

It's great news. Regarding NHS staff, I really hope that at the very least those who work with immunocompromised patients take it. If not, I think they're in the wrong job. As someone who is likely to be immunocompromised in the near future, I feel I should have the right to know if the person treating me does not want to have the vaccine, so I can refuse treatment from them.

Do people really think that the drugs and medicines they consume are only approved 5-10 years after the completion of Phase III trials?

Well, in most cases the drugs people are taking HAVE been widely used for many years, so they don't have to think about that.

Most people don't ever have to be the first to take any drugs or vaccines immediately after phase III trials end. I'd imagine they'd feel equally apprehensive if they were.

I'm an NHS front line worker and will happily have it. I've also volunteered for shifts to administer it when it's rolled out to other groups.

I’m going to bow out of this thread now as have a busy day ahead. I really respect everyone’s right to make the right choice for them. Interesting to chat to you all and wish you all the best.

So bearing all that in mind, while the risk of long-term health problems or death from COVID-19 is probably higher than the vaccine most people, it is at least understandable why some people are apprehensive about being the first to take it.

I 100% get this.

But what’s the alternative? Stay in lockdown until when? We aren’t getting the vaccine for shits and giggles.

So if people aren’t prepared to take it, then they have to choose continuing to live under restrictions OR let others take all the risks for them. Any reservations I have about the vaccine are more palatable than either of these options for me.

'don’t think it will work, they can’t find a cure for the common cold, influenza, so I doubt they can for this.'

Common colds don't tend to result in acute respiratory failure. Why would they spend millions to find a vaccine for a mild illness?! and also there is of course a vaccine for influenza.

It isn't a cure its a vaccine. Big difference. And there is a vaccine for flu.

@Belladonna12

It's great news. Regarding NHS staff, I really hope that at the very least those who work with immunocompromised patients take it. If not, I think they're in the wrong job. As someone who is likely to be immunocompromised in the near future, I feel I should have the right to know if the person treating me does not want to have the vaccine, so I can refuse treatment from them.

It’s not been proven that the vaccine stops you getting COVID-19 , just that it lessens symptoms.

Right, really am off now!