Am I missing something? Percentage of people immune by February

[perhapstomorrow]

So Boris has said that he wants the top 4 groups vaccinated by mid Feb. This equates to 13 million. However, by concentrating on just one dose, this means that the effectiveness is 64% as opposed to 90% if two doses are given. By my calculations this means that approx only 12% of population will be immune from the vaccine come February. This doesn't seem that great to stop it spreading?

I think it's not the quantity alone but the group of people covered. Once the more vulnerable are safe there will be less concern about spread as the cases being high alone are not a concern if it's limited to "mild" cases but the hospital admissions and deaths are the concerns. So hopefully by a large proportion of the older and vulnerable community having some immunity both those figures will come down

I don't really understand your calculation.

The 60-70% figure from 1 vaccine dose has been challenged. Some data suggests that the Pfizer vaccine could actually be 90% effective 10 days after the first dose

Anyway the aim is not to make people completely immune but to stop the worst consequences of death and hospital admissions especially. That is likely to be achieved by one dose. No-one in the Oxford trial vaccine group was admitted to hospital vs the placebo group where a number were and one died.

We need to get on and get the maximum coverage of the most at risk groups done in order to bring down the numbers in hospital and thus be able to give people proper treatment for Covid and non Covid conditions

As soon as the supplies of the Oxford vaccine get to the frontline we will be able to ramp up our vaccination effort exponentially. I am very happy to stick a needle in peoples arms all my evenings and weekends on top of my day job if it gets this thing over with as are any other Drs and nurses that I know.

Knew I was missing something!! I was thinking of overall figures needing to come down but yes the aim is reducing the cases that would end up in hospital.

Figures were pulled from Google so perhaps out of date.

If he was talking about immunity generally, they might be including natural immunity in those who've recovered from it.

I have a (probably stupid) question: let's say that by February they have immunised all the old people and doctors.

Doesn't that mean it's more likely that everyone else will catch the virus because it will have fewer hosts to "choose from"?

I don't want to go back to normal until I've been immunised. But as I'm in my thirties and work from home and I just feel like it's never going to happen.

Yes it’s who you cover first

If you stick with the current plan and immunise those who are at greatest risks of the serious disease there is immense benefit in giving them a jab whose proven effect is to make the disease mild (it’s taking the CEV/elderly and giving the the same risk as a previously healthy under 50 yo)

Yes it’ll be even better when the CV and over 50s are also included

But when you’re looking at reducing hospitalisation so sharply that the risk of overwhelming the NHS subsided substantially it makes considerable sense to start looking at being able to return to tiers and move down tiers as they are done and pressure comes off hospitals

And by then, we should have a considerably better idea of whether the suspected sterilising immunity is also real.

Vacinnati g these groups has nothing to do with stolpj g the spread... These groups are pur my about reducing hospitalisation and deaths.

If it was about stopping the spread the. Young would all be vaccinated first.

Stopping and purely**

@garlictwist yes, this is what worries me too. I’ve spent all this time trying really hard not to catch it, and yet there is (understandably given there are much more high risk people to do first) no mention of when younger people will be offered the vaccine. I fear it will be a long time.