I fucking knew it. Second vaccine dose.

[NiceGerbil]

News is that people who have had first dose are only getting second 3 months later. Against the guidelines of the org who made the vaccine.

I said this rush to push it out would result in, how are they going to follow up and make sure they get the second?

And here we go. Second dose not organised. UK govt say this is AOK.

FFS. I'd rather they took the time to do it properly. But hey. Pissup in a brewery situation again.

I said a few days ago to DH. Are they properly tracking this to make sure the follow up jab isn't missed?

I was too optimistic. Govt have decided second jab isn't that important.

FFS.

However, there is no maximum interval between the first and second dose for either vaccine

From: www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/clinical-considerations.html

@AldiAisleofCrap why are you ignoring all the posts explaining what the 52% figure actually means as an average and continuing to post incorrect information?

@MoreLikeThis My parents have had one dose and that will give them 91% effectiveness. That's ok. Two doses would have given them 95% effectiveness. I really hope you haven’t told your parents this, you would be putting them at considerable risk. The Oxford be dose is 52% effective not 91% , why would you think that!
And you posted about facts being wrong!

@MoreLikeThis sorry the Pfizer vaccine not Oxford.

Are people aware of the vaccine shortage? We may have earmarked 10 m doses of AZ bug as far as I’m aware just over 500k are actually available. As for Pfizer if rumours are to be believed post January there’s nothing till March.

The vaccine supply issue is a huge problem. We need to vaccinate min 2m people a week. This isn’t going to happen even with Oxford.

@AldiAisleofCrap I expect it was me not listening properly- we were out in the park and my toddler was determinedly trying to take a swim with the ducks.
I thought I saw someone else further up thread also mention that the additional protection was only 4 or 5%? Perhaps that is the case for the Oxford vaccine?

@MarcelineMissouri I am ignoring post that’s are factually incorrect.

AldiAisleofCrap I think the rate is very low for the first two weeks, then rises to 86-91% in the third week, so the best advice would be for patients to shield for two weeks after the jab completely, and then only consider themselves less at risk after three weeks. Less at risk of having covid/severe response themselves, they may get it and transmit it asymptomatically, who knows?

No, continually stating that one dose of the Pfizer vaccine is only 52% effective is the factually incorrect information.

You could turn up 3 months later for your 2nd dose, and get a different vaccine from the 1st. This definitely hasn't been tested in clinical studies.

@MarcelineMissouri so despite the fact that the average protection of one dose of the Pfizer vaccine is 52% you expect me to believe the majority of people will actually have 90% protection! Are you Michael Gove?

[quote Oaktree55]@RedToothBrush I’m following both countries it’s v equitable if you care to read up. What’s happening in U.K. is an utter disgrace. Israel is on course to have its vulnerable vaccinated this month.

When will people hold our country accountable for incompetence?!?!?[/quote]
Do you want a lesson in demographics?

The median age in Israel is 29.7. TWENTY NINE.
The number of people over 80 is around 220,000.
About 2.8% of the population is over 80.
Only around 10% of the population are over 65.

The median age of the UK is about 40.
The number of people in the UK over 80 is around 3million
This is about 4.7% of the population.
About 20% of the population is over 65.

Then think about the number of nurses and doctors you have to serve the population too.

Now think about supply issues with manufacturing the vaccine. There is only so much vaccine available. There isn't going to be 3million doses available.

Its much much easier to vaccinate a population which is smaller, younger and has less clinically vulnerable (due primarily to age).

Comparing the two exactly a fair comparison.

The irony here is, I'm someone who is as a rule, very very critical of the government and how it has handled this crisis.

I also, however, have an idea of realism and the logistics that also stem from being a large population which is aging.

@MarcelineMissouri
The Pfizer and BioNTech covid-19 vaccine may provide some early protection, starting 12 days after the first dose, the peer reviewed results of a phase III trial have found.

The study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine,1 found that vaccine efficacy between the first and second doses was 52% (95% credible interval 29.5% to 68.4%), with 39 cases of covid-19 in the vaccine group and 82 cases in the placebo group.

Seven or more days after the second dose, vaccine efficacy then rose to 95% (90.3% to 97.6%), with eight covid-19 cases reported in the vaccine group and 162 cases in the placebo group.

@MarcelineMissouri this link suggests @AldiAisleofCrap is correct re: Pfizer efficacy
www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4826

@makingnumber2, that poster is determined to quote the misleading 52% figure, despite it being repeatedly explained on this thread. The second dose of the Pfizer vaccine only increases the effectiveness by a few percent.

The bit which is a gamble is that we are expecting the immunity to remain reasonably high for the 3-12 week interval without the second dose. Given everything we know about how human immunity works it is (IMO) a small risk, and one worth taking.

Seriously, when Pfizer's came up for approval, the large % (high 99s, but I cannot remember the actual number) of protection was announced AFTER the second dose. First dose was low, I cannot remeber 52% or not, but around there.
Wednesday announcement about Astra mentioned 90% first, 95% second. From the goverment themselves.
Now.... suddenly all the numbers are on the 90s. Or move on their own to the 90s.
This is a changing world!

@Whydoelephants

I actually think this is a rare wise decision. I think those who have had the first dose are very very lucky compared to the extremely vulnerable older people and frontline staff who are risking their lives every day caring for Covid patients who haven’t yet had a dose. Surely it’s much better for those to have a bit of protection too rather than a very small group having total protection and others having none?

Agree with this. I also think frontline staff and teachers should be prioritized, they have no choice but to put themselves at risk every day.

@Poppingnostopping

AldiAisleofCrap I think the rate is very low for the first two weeks, then rises to 86-91% in the third week, so the best advice would be for patients to shield for two weeks after the jab completely, and then only consider themselves less at risk after three weeks. Less at risk of having covid/severe response themselves, they may get it and transmit it asymptomatically, who knows?

This has been pointed out repeatedly, but the poster just ignores it.

There are certain people here who are following an agenda, and no facts or reasoning can divert them from it. Best not to bother.

The vaccine supply issue is a huge problem. We need to vaccinate min 2m people a week. This isn’t going to happen even with Oxford.

Astra Zeneca have already said they can manufacture 2million doses a week for the UK if the UK have the logistic capacity for delivering them to patients. Their manufacturing capacity is already there.

@RedToothBrush they’re still vaccinating more per day than we are!!!! That’s my point.

@RedToothBrush I’ll believe the supply when I see it. From what I’m reading there’s a huge shortage on components such as glass vials etc

My Dad had the vaccine on Wednesday evening and he has been given the date for the second one.

I think this approach is ok, I can certainly see the benefits but obviously only if the gov is certain when they will receive further supplies for the second dose.

We cannot trust the goverment.
At this rate, it looks like we cannot trust the Regulator either.
Are we going to need checking the whole data ourselves? It is idiotic! They just change numbers, data, rules, against the more knowledgable of all, the manufacturer.
But it is us, who do not get it. Because we are stupid.
All is well. Schools are safe.
Just stay home.
Forever!
All sorted.

@MarcelineMissouri

No, continually stating that one dose of the Pfizer vaccine is only 52% effective is the factually incorrect information.

It is 51% on average in the first 21 days.

But if you look at the actual data, rather than what some other incorrect poster has stated, then the minimum effectiveness figure used to collate the average for days 22-28 (ie after dose 2) is 61%.

This is why it is actually criminal to suggest that 'it shoots up to 86%'. This is not a maximum that is on a linear line over time, which is why 2 days later it can be as low as 61%. There is a reason that averages are used.

I would take anything at the minute
ECV and shielding for 9 months

My dad (75) hasn't had to shield, has been out and about the whole time, no health conditions and will be offered it first. He will take it but said he would rather give it to me

My haematologist has said about doses being offered out when people don't turn up and said basically keep my ears open when I'm in hospital for appointments. Mine are in the Macmillan centre so I'm kind of hoping they might shout and offer any out

I'm worried about work as well, I have to book time off so for two doses means two days off work at possibly short notice.. hopefully I can get the time off or they offer evening appointments