@PurpleWh1teGreen
I've seen that publication, thank you!
And not to be disruptive, but to highlight how messy things are when you are not joe general public....
From the lancet article:
"There is a robust and comprehensive regulatory process in place and approval is only given when there are compelling safety data."
From Int'l IBD research org and most IBD organizations: "Patients with immune conditions (including IBD) were excluded from the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine clinical development programmes,....."
So, what is the robust regulatory system basing it's recommendation on?
And IBD is just one, there might be so many other smaller conditions that are falling through the cracks :(
re: further down the A1 - thanks, but in all honesty, I think their policy will be the same... I will call them though.
I have never agreed with the UK's vacc rollout plan, but this is taking it to another level. At this point we should be in a position to be able to nuance and look at/follow a bit more of the international scene.
But despite a year having gone in the UK discussion is on "we should be focusing on airborne transmission...." and ppl are flying in freely from places like India, Brazil,.... god, I despair.
And regardless everything I am not saying that IBD patients should have been prioritized but I do think that for best results there would need to be a differentiation. If nothing else, but because of the care of cost is eye watering:
"The annual cost for any patient with CD was estimated to be £6156 (£1800 for patients in remission; £10 513 for patients in relapse)." *
So if we can prevent even a small number of relapses it's a win for the NHS both in money and resources.
*www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5369575/#:~:text=There%20are%20an%20estimated%20620,(IBD)%20in%20the%20UK.